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: ROOM G.53 (FORMERLY COMMITTEE ROOM 2) - GROUND FLOOR, TOWN HALL, TOWN HALL SQUARE, LEICESTER

Items
No. Item

1.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Minutes:

R. Gill, D. Martin (LRGT), M. Johnson (LAHS).

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 94 KB

The minutes of the meeting held on 24th February 2016 are attached and the Panel is asked to confirm them as a correct record.

Minutes:

S. Eppel queried minutes of January meeting, which she had requested be amended. Revised minutes will be sent to members.

4.

CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS pdf icon PDF 93 KB

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

Minutes:

A) YORK STREET

Planning Application 20160610

Seven storey student block

 

Panel was generally happy with the height as this is in keeping with the general character of the area (although some members thought it was too tall for the width of the street).

 

Discussion about the level of articulation of the windows, the set-back of the top floor and use of materials. Query about level of window recesses.

Concerns raised over the darkness of the materials and fenestration but the panel were satisfied that the general development would not harm the character or appearance of the Granby Street Conservation Area or nearby heritage assets. Requested amendments to materials and fenestration.

 

Seek amendments.

 

B) STAMFORD BUILDINGS, STAMFORD STREET

Planning application 20151730

Change of use from factory to student accommodation, 6-storey side extension & 2-storey roof extension

 

Revised proposal is substantially better. No further objections.

 

No objection

 

C) 65-75 PRINCESS ROAD EAST

Planning Application 20160758

New student development

 

Revised proposal is substantially better, particularly the height and scale.

Concerns about the canopy, which does not fit well with the context or use.Suggested that this element be removed.

Query over the number of flats and their internal size and layout.

General concern about the legibility of the plans.

 

No objection

________________________________________________________________

 

D) ABBEY MEADOWS, SITE OF FORMER WOLSEY WORKS

Planning Application 20160614

Demolition, redevelopment

 

Link between water tower and housing considered to be crude. Suggestion that the tower should be freestanding with an extension, rather than part of a new terrace - looks cramped and loses role as focal point.

 

Mix of views on the style of houses, some are welcomed but others a missed opportunity. New houses by water tower are too plain and boring (better examples on wider site).

 

Loss of second chimney regretted but the overall site layout, including pathways and parks, was welcomed.

 

Seek amendments

 

________________________________________________________________

 

E) CORPORATION ROAD, ABBEY PUMPING STATION

Planning Application 20160483

Events space, marquee

 

 

Panel sought clarification on landscape implications. Following additional explanation, they raised no objections.

 

No objection

 

________________________________________________________________

 

F) 12 APPLEGATE, WYGSTON’S HOUSE

Planning Application 20160569

Change of use, alterations

 

No objection to change of use. Support bringing asset back into use. More flue details requested; ideally located in existing chimney. Panel raised concern to air exchange in the main restaurant (silver flue at ASK restaurant being of concern). Could bar be freestanding, rather than attached to timber frame (SPV explained fixings would be in mortar work). Lift in Victorian section; more details requested. Subtle approach requested for lift with minimal structure. 

 

No objection

_____________________________________________________________

 

G) 52-56 HIGH STREET

Application 20160657

Roof extension

 

The existing building is very fine looking and the proposed development would ruin it

Existing comparable scheme on St Nicholas Place is ungainly looking. Would result in the loss of an attractive roofscape and set an unwelcome precedent.

Principle of residential use is fine, but needs to be done a lot more sensitively.

 

Objection

 

H) R/O 24 RATCLIFFE ROAD

Planning Application 20160335

Demolition, new development

 

Panel expressed some concerns  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.