Venue: Meeting Room G.02, Ground Floor, City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester, LE1 1FZ
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
R. Gill (Chair), R. Lawrence (Vice-Chair), D. Martin (LRGT), N. Stacey (LSA)
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 12th September 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) LEICESTER CATHEDRAL
B) 96 JARROM STREET
Planning Application 20180801
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING; CONSTRUCTION OF NINE STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING COMPRISING OF 180 RESIDENTIAL FLATS (2X 1BED, 1X 2BED, 177X STUDIO) (CLASS C3); GROUND FLOOR UNIT FOR NURSERY/RETAIL/RESTAURANT (CLASS D1/A1/A3)
The panel commented on the proposal in terms of its setting. The scale and massing were focused on, and some concerns were expressed in relation to the close proximity of the new development to the Grade II* and Grade II Listed properties across the street from the site. Some positive comments were voiced regarding the new multi-storey structure proposed, while others commented on the lack of contextual responsiveness of the design. The existence of several larger modern developments elsewhere in close proximity to the Designated Assets was mentioned, but the reduction in scale away from the hospital site was noted.
The panel concluded that verified views (already requested by the LCC) are required to reach a firm decision on the proposal.
MORE INFORMATION REQUIRED
C) GYPSY LANE, LAND TO REAR OF GRANGE COTTAGE
Planning Application 20182053
CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE (1X 4BED) (CLASS C3); INSTALLATION OF 1.8 METRE HIGH GATE/FENCE AND HARD SURFACING TO FRONT; ALTERATIONS
The majority of the comments received on this application focused on the low quality and unsympathetic relationship of the proposed house in relation to the neighbouring Grade II Listed properties. Although no objections were voiced in regards to the potential development of the plot and the relative scale of the development, its spatial relationship to the above mentioned properties was criticized.
In all, due to poor quality of design, as well as lack of adequate reference of the scale, form and materials of the proposed structure to its context, an objection was advanced.