This is a default template, your custom branding appears to be missing.
The custom branding should be at https://www.leicester.gov.uk/cabinet-pages-template/ if you cannot load this page please contact your IT.

Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Meeting Room G.02, Ground Floor, City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester, LE1 1FZ

Items
No. Item

1.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Minutes:

M. Queally (UoL), Rev. R. Curtis (LDAC), D. Lyne (LIHS)

 

 

2.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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

Minutes:

None.

 

 

3.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 103 KB

The Minutes of the meeting held on 13th January 2016 are attached and the Panel is asked to confirm them as a correct record.

Minutes:

The Panel agreed the minutes.

4.

CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS pdf icon PDF 83 KB

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

Minutes:

A) 127-133 GRANBY STREET

Planning Application 20152417

Demolition and redevelopment

 

The panel supported the proposal, noting that the front elevation of the new build had interesting articulation and good depth; having a positive impact upon the streetscene.

 

They were happy with the height of the development, as the top floor is recessed, reducing its visual impact upon the street.

 

No Objections

 

B) 61 GREAT CENTRAL STREET

Planning Application 20151041

Demolition and redevelopment

 

Concerns were raised over the height of the 7-storey extension, as it will exceed the height of the original factory building and conflicts with the height parameters as set out within the Waterside SPD. The panel suggested that the extension needed to have a lower perceived height and that this could be achieved by limiting the extension to 6-storey. They did however like the articulation of the top floor of the extension and would wish for this to remain, albeit in a lower extension.

 

The panel noted that the set-back of the stairwell was beneficial, as it allows you to appreciate the corner of the original factory building; the retention of the cartouche on the opposite gable was also welcomed (subject to a suitable method statement). They were happy with the general design and palette of materials proposed.

 

Seek Amendments

___________________________________________________________________

 

C) FORMER BLACK BOY PH ALBION STREET

Planning Application 20151948

Demolition and redevelopment

 

The panel raised strong objections to the proposal, stating that they did not wish to see the loss of the former Black Boy PH and that they would prefer to see the façade retained as a minimum.

 

Notwithstanding their objection to the principle of the proposal, concerns were also raised over the size, scale and design of the new build. It was noted that the building was too tall, that the silver brick finish is inappropriate for the location and that the development doesn’t contribute to the prominent corner location. They did however concede that that the brick/glazing ratio of the elevations was good and that the recessed & curved ground floor works.

 

Objections

__________________________________________________________________

 

D) THE GUILDHALL

Listed Building Consent 20160150

New sign

 

The proposed signage was considered acceptable, as the panel appreciated the need to improve the visual awareness of the Guildhall and were satisfied that the signage was reversible, having minimal impact upon the historic fabric.

 

They did however insist that fixings are positioned within the mortar joints and wish for the council to carefully control the method of fixation.

 

No Objections

__________________________________________________________________

 

E) QUEEN STREET, ATHENA

Listed Building Consent 20160220, Planning Application 20160004

Three storey extension

 

The majority of the panel accepted the principle of a 3-storey extension to the side of the Athena above the existing kitchen block, noting that it will appear subservient to the listed building.

 

Concerns were however raised over the design of the extension. The panel felt that a polite extension was proposed, but that they would prefer a more stand-alone and contemporary addition.

 

The panel discussed exactly how this could be achieved,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.