new created by neevia document converter trial version … on... · 2015. 5. 26. · houses. there...

Created by Neevia Document Converter trial version

Planning & Development Control Committee Date 19th February 2008

1

Wards: See individual reports.


REPORTS ON APPLICATIONS AND CONTRAVENTIONS

Report of the Service Director, Planning & Policy

1 Introduction

1.1 The City Council has resolved that reports to any committee must address the implications of the action recommended in relation to finance, equal opportunities, policy, legal issues, sustainability and the environment and crime and disorder.

1.2 This report deals with development control matters on which the recommendations must be based on material planning considerations as set out in the Planning Acts and associated regulations, circulars and central government guidance. The following implications paragraphs relate to all the recommendations in this report.

2 Financial Implications

2.1 The cost of operating the development control service, including processing applications and pursuing enforcement action, is met from the Development Control Group budget which takes account of the income expected to be generated by planning application fees.

2.2 Development Control decisions can result in appeals to the Secretary of State or in some circumstances legal challenges which can have cost implications for the City Council. Where there are special costs directly relevant to a recommendation these are discussed in the individual reports.

3 Equal Opportunities Implications

3.1 To assist the City Council to identify the impact of planning application decisions, these are monitored by the ethnic group of the applicant. It is established policy not to identify individual applicants by ethnic origin as this would be against assurances of confidentiality. I am also unable to give numbers of applications in each group as in some cases these are so small that individual applicants could be identified. Regular reports are sent to Members giving the results of this monitoring.

Created by Neevia Document Converter trial version http://www.neevia.com

http://www.neevia.com


2

4 Policy Implications

4.1 Planning applications must be decided in accordance with the provision of Development Plan, principally the City of Leicester Local Plan and the Leicestershire Structure Plan, unless these are outweighed by other material considerations. The latter include supplementary planning guidance, site specific development briefs produced by the City Council, and emerging/ updated versions of the Development Plan. Individual reports refer to the policies relevant to the recommendation.

5 Legal Implications

5.1 The recommendations in this report are made under powers contained in the Planning Acts. Specific legal implications, including the service of statutory notices, initiating prosecution proceedings and preparation of legal agreements are identified in individual reports. As appropriate, the Head of Legal Services has been consulted and his comments are incorporated in individual reports.

6 Human Rights Act

6.1 Members will be aware that the Human Rights Act 1998 is now in force. Provisions in the Act relevant to considering planning applications are Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life), Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property) and, where relevant, Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination).

6.2 In terms of reports on enforcement action, preparatory information, including details of ownership, has been sought in the light of current case law. The Head of Legal Services takes the view that obtaining such information does not relate to a trial process and so does not breach Article 6 (the right to a fair trial).

6.3 The uncertainty over whether the Secretary of State can “call in” planning appeals because of potential incompatibility with the Human Rights Act has been clarified by a decision of the House of Lords. They decided that the Secretary of State’s powers to call in planning applications, or to recover planning appeals for decision by him, are lawful and do not breach Article 6. This clarification lessens the possibility of any challenge, under human rights legislation, to enforcement action.

7 Sustainability and Environmental Implications

7.1 The City of Leicester Local Plan has been subjected to a full sustainability appraisal. The sustainability implications material to each recommendation, including any Environmental Statement, submitted with a planning application, are examined in each report.

7.2 The following applications in this report are accompanied by an Environmental Statement:

Page App. No. Address Ward Report Section




3

8 Crime and Disorder Implications

8.1 Issues of crime prevention and personal safety are material considerations in development control recommendations. Where relevant these are dealt with in individual reports.

9 Consultations

9.1 Consultations with other departments and external organisations are referred to in individual reports.

10 Background Papers

10.1 Copies of individual planning applications are available for inspection in the Customer Service Centre, New Walk Centre. Representations and consultation responses on individual applications are kept on application files which can be inspected by contacting the Planning Management & Delivery, extension 7249.

11 Officer to Contact

11.1 Authors of individual contravention and application reports, via Extension 7249 or Mike Richardson, Head of Planning Management & Delivery, Extension 7244.




4

CONTENTS PAGE NOS.

CONTRAVENTION MATTERS -

APPLICATIONS 5 - 53

PLANNING INSPECTORATE APPEAL DECISIONS 54 - 61

INDEX

19th February 2008 Page Main

Page Addn

Application Number

Address Area Ward Report Section

5 20072036 9 BATH STREET PO BE CO 13 20072152 17A DUXBURY ROAD, MASJID-AL-

HUSAYN MOSQUE PF CO RF 16 20072213 10-12 FAIRFAX ROAD PO RM CO 23 20072228 WELFORD ROAD, AYLESTONE ROAD,

LEICESTER RUGBY FOOTBALL CLUB PR CA CO 38 20072259 FORMER LINREAD SITE, ABBEY LANE PR AB CO 44 20072260 CORNER OF ABBEY LANE AND ABBEY

PARK ROAD (FORMER LINREAD SITE) PR AB CO 54 20072332 13 TOLLER ROAD PO KN CO 57 20078033A 10 CALVER HEY ROAD W BL APL

59 20078041A 32 WESTLEIGH ROAD w WC APL




5

Recommendation: Conditional approval

20072036 9 BATH STREET

Proposal: CHANGE OF USE FROM INDUSTRIAL (CLASS B2) TO COMMUNITY CENTRE AND PLACE OF WORSHIP

Applicant: HATIM JAFERJI AND ANWAR KAPASI

App type: Change of use

Status: Major development

Expiry Date: 19 March 2008

SB1 WARD: Belgrave

Introduction

The application site is a vacant factory building, part two-storey, and part single storey, located in a Primarily Residential Area as defined in the City of Leicester Local Plan. The property is surrounded by a mixture of 2-storey semi-detached and terraced houses. There is an employment use on Bath Street to the north of the site. The building has a gross floor area of 650sq m, while the site has an area of 1960sq m. The Dawoodi Bohra Business community is a group within the Dawoodi Bohra community of Leicester, and has 35 families as members, comprising 138 individuals. The community currently has a centre on Wellington Street in the City centre but wishes to relocate to larger premises in order to extend its activities.

OVERING CLOSE

BATH STREET

LINFORD STREET

FIELDHOUSE ROAD

CLEMENT AVENUE

2

10

1

10

8

2

57

3

13

15

Works

7

7

6

1

12

Works

Hall

Hall8

12

22

3

1

AdultSchool

12

1314

17

16

1217 18

19

1513

14

108

16 to 22

9

7a

9

221

PH

6

23

1214

© Crown Copyright Reserved. Leicester City Council Licence 100019264 (2008), Scale 1:1250




6

Background Application 20051042 for the demolition of the building and redevelopment of the site with 20 flats was refused in September 2005, on the grounds of overdevelopment, insufficient on-site parking provision and unacceptable outlook and amenity. Application 20060472 for 18 flats was approved in July 2007. The Proposal The main building would be retained and the use changed to a Community Centre and Place of Worship. The outbuildings, including a two storey building on the southern boundary would be demolished. One outbuilding on the southern boundary would be retained for use as a cycle store. Within the building, the area behind the entrance would become a lobby and refreshments area, with a small kitchen to the side. The former main factory floor would be used for the activities listed below, and the rear section would be a prayer area. There is a first floor to the front part of the building, and this would be offices as existing. The hours of use proposed are 0800 to 2300 daily. The applicants state that the centre would serve community members and the immediate local community. The Design and Access Statement lists the proposed activities as follows: - Educational activities and seminars for women, girls, boys and the elderly; - Keep fit and martial arts for men, women, boys and girls; - Cooking and housekeeping classes; - Coffee mornings and language classes for the elderly; - Committee meetings; - Use by other groups such as Asra Midland Housing association or Belgrave Neighbourhood Co-op; - Prayers.

The premises would not be let out for other groups to use except for local community groups in the immediate vicinity of Bath Street & Loughborough Road . Residents in immediate vicinity of the site would be encouraged to use the facilities. The estimated number using the centre on a regular basis would be between 30 to 150. There would be four occasions during the year when there may be between 150 to 180 people attending, which the applicant calculates would require approximately 38 car parking spaces.

A Design and Access Statement, List of members and addresses, Transport Statement (TS) and a draft Travel Plan (TP) are submitted with the application. Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report.




7

Further guidance on design, minimum distances and effect on amenity of neighbouring properties is contained in the approved ‘Design Guide for House Extensions’ and the draft Residential Amenity SPG. Guidance on parking standards is included in Appendix 1 of the Local Plan and in the Vehicle Parking Standards SPG. Consultations Local Highway Authority - The LHA accepts the Transport Assessment as satisfactory in the information it provides. However a detailed Travel Plan is required. No objections in principle subject to conditions Representations 27 letters of objection including a petition with 9 signatures have been received. The objectors include the industrial use at 11 Bath Street. 96 letters have been received in support of the application. The grounds of objection are:

• The community centre will not meet the needs of the whole community. Not clear who it will be for;

• There are other places of worship nearby;

• Traffic will adversely affect the area particularly as the Bestway development (171 houses) will use Bath Street, the Jungle Club generates a lot of traffic, Belgrave hotel being re-developed to flats etc;

• Bath Street is a cul-de-sac unsuitable for large volumes of traffic as it is narrow and cars will need to turn round – dangerous for pedestrians and children playing;

• The number of parking spaces will not be adequate for the bigger events; car sharing cannot be enforced; Jungle Club and other pub and restaurant customers already park in this area;

• Noise from car park and street parking;

• Access for emergency vehicles would be restricted;

• Most of the users will not live in the area;

• Proposed hours of use excessive – too late at night, should not be every day;

• Waste bins should not be located next to adjacent houses;

• The initial publicity did not include place of worship in the description.

The reasons for support are:

• The facility is badly needed in the area;

• It will help to foster better relations with all the communities in the area;

• It will add value to the area.




8

Consideration Change of use

Policy H13 states that non-residential uses in residential areas will not be approved unless it can be demonstrated that there would be no significantly adverse effect on the area in terms of its residential character, and traffic. Policy CL08 states that community facilities should be located where they are accessible by a range of transport. Planning permission for such development will be granted provided the scale of the activities and peak numbers do not cause unacceptable disturbance to nearby occupiers, and provided the traffic and car parking would not cause congestion or a safety hazard. Therefore the use could be acceptable in principle depending on an assessment of the impact of the proposal on the amenity of the area. As with most community centres, the exact uses of the centre are likely to vary according to demand, and new uses may be introduced which are not among those listed. This would be acceptable provided the uses fall within the D1 use class and comply with planning conditions. The publicity for this application originally did not include ‘Place of Worship’ in the description. This is because the proposal was not so described by the applicants, who describe the proposed centre as a community centre and not as a Place of Worship. However, as prayers will take place within the building, the description was amended, although the submitted plans indicate that the area allocated for prayers is relatively small and the building would be primarily a community centre. More importantly, the numbers attending for prayer would be limited to members of this group and therefore would be relatively small. The key issues in assessing the impact of the proposal on the area are as follows: Appearance No external alterations are proposed apart from demolition of the outbuildings. I consider that this will not adversely affect the street scene, and it would not of itself require planning permission.

Residential Amenity

As no new building is proposed, light and outlook to adjacent properties would be unaffected. The demolition of the outbuildings and the increased use of the building, particularly in the evenings, give rise to the possibility of increased overlooking and loss of privacy to adjacent properties. However, there are no windows in the north and east (rear) elevations of the building. The south side elevation is single storey and is 18m from the rear elevations of houses on Linford Street, which I consider to be adequate. 7a Bath Street is located next to the main entrance, but has no principal windows in the side elevation and therefore is unlikely to suffer any loss of privacy even if the first floor offices are used later in the evening.




9

There is also the issue of noise arising from the use of the car park and from people leaving the building, particularly later in the evening. The building is very close to residential properties, and it is likely that if activities cease at 2300 it could be considerably later before users leave the building. I consider that this would be unaceptable in this residential area. I therefore consider that, if the application is approved, a condition should require that activities cease at 2230 hours in order to ensure that users disperse in reasonable time. This would be comparable to the permitted hours at other centres. I do not consider it necessary to further restrict the hours on any particular day. With regard to noise arising from the use of the building, there are windows only on the front and south sides, and it does not appear that any of the proposed activities are likely to generate significant noise. I consider that this issue can be dealt with by suitable conditions. The proposed location of the bin store close to the boundary with 7a is not acceptable, and amended plans are awaited. These will be reported to your committee. Traffic and parking Traffic - The transport assessment’s findings are as follows:

• 29% of the community members live within 2km of the proposed facility and 64% live within 4km of the proposed facility. The site is served by several bus services

• The assessment assumes that 75%of families within 2km of the development will walk to the site and 50% within 4km will l travel by alternative modes of transport to the private car. On this basis, the proposal would generate 23 trips during the weekday evening peak and 6 trips during the weekday morning peak.

• Trip generation rates for the proposed use, the previously approved residential use, and the previous employment use are compared and these demonstrate that the proposal will create a lesser impact in traffic terms than the residential use and less or equal at peak times than the former industrial use

• the peak traffic volume form the centre would be on weekday evenings after 1900. The main Friday prayer time is predicted to generate less traffic than the midweek evening peak.

• there are existing Traffic Regulation Orders in place, in and around the junction, to restrict waiting and loading. The junction with Loughborough Road is traffic light controlled and provides safe crossing facilities for users of the centre. Accident data in the area indicates no particular hazard.

• It is proposed to introduce a car sharing scheme for community members, detailed in the travel Plan

However, the Transport assessment assumes that only group members would use the centre, whereas the stated intention is for the centre to be available for the local community to use. Thus larger numbers may attend than forecast in the Transport




10

assessment. However, with the exception of the infrequent larger events, it is expected that these increased numbers would come from the local community, who are more likely to walk than take the car, and therefore the impact on traffic generated is unlikely to be significant, particularly if the Travel Plan is implemented. However, I recommend that, in order to protect the amenity of residents, conditions should be attached restricting the numbers which can be present in the building at any one time. Parking - The site is located in LCC parking zone 4 and the former B2 Use would have required 10 off-street car parking spaces plus a suitable loading/servicing area. For the proposed D1 use, (or for a D2 use), parking is required at the rate of 1 space for

every 22 m2 of floors pace, which gives a maximum of 30 car parking spaces.

However the requirement can be reduced if the site is near a good bus route. Parking is proposed to the front and to the rear of the building, with 3 spaces for disabled people at the front and 35 spaces to the rear. There would be an area for cycle racks and waste bins on the south boundary. The number of car parking spaces is considered to be acceptable, but the positioning of the spaces for disabled people is impractical, and some of the spaces restrict access to the waste bins/cycle racks. A revised layout has been requested and will be reported to your committee. Although the number of parking spaces complies with standards, there is still a likelihood of parking spilling over on to the surrounding streets when and if larger events take place.. Bath Street itself has parking restrictions, which makes the adjacent residential cul-de-sacs more vulnerable. I therefore consider that a condition is required restricting the number of large events (150 plus) to four per annum. Flood risk - an area of approximately 200 square metres to the front of the site is within an area liable to flooding. Severn Trent Water have indicated in relation to previous applications that they have no objections in principle. In conclusion, I consider that the change of use would not give rise to any significant amenity or traffic problems provided appropriate conditions are attached, and could provide a useful community facility. I therefore recommend APPROVAL subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. START WITHIN THREE YEARS 2. The parking areas shall be retained and kept available for use for parking at all

times. (In the interest of residential amenity and in accordance with policies AM11, AM01 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

3. A minimum of 8 Cycle parking spaces and 2 Powered Two Wheeler (PTW)

spaces are required and should be provided under cover and secure. The parking shall be completed before the development is occupied, and shall be retained. (To secure the satisfactory development of the site and in accordance with policy AM02 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

4. At the same time as the remainder of the development, all parking areas shall be

surfaced and marked out in accordance with details which shall first have been




11

agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority, and shall be retained and not used for any other purpose. (To ensure that parking can take place in a satisfactory manner, and in accordance with policy AM11 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

5. Space shall be kept available within the curtilage of the site to allow for loading

and unloading always to take place within the site. (In the interests in highway safety,and in accordance with policies AM01 and AM17 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

6. A turning space to enable vehicles always to enter and leave the site in a forward

direction, shall be kept available within the site. (In the interests of highway safety, and in accordance with policies AM01 and AM17 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

7. All streetworks shall be constructed in accordance with the Leicestershire County

Council's 'Highway Requirements for Development'. (To achieve a satisfactory form of development, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

8. 2 metre by 2 metre sight lines on each side of the vehicular access shall be

provided at the time of development and shall be retained. (In the interests of the safety of pedestrians and other road users, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

9. A Travel Plan relating to the development, which shall identify modal splits,

proposals, targets, objectives, time scales and monitoring techniques, for discouraging the use of private cars to and from the development and encouraging the use of alternative means of travel, including increase use of public transport, shall be submitted to and agreed by the City Council as the local planning authority beforee the development is commenced and implemented in accordance with the agreement. The Travel Plan shall include provision for transport mode, measures to minimise pollution, and travel pattern surveys to be conducted every twelve months or at intervals to be agreed for a minimum period of 10 years and until 2015 from the first occupation of the development, and shall examine the contribution that can be made by walking, cycling, use of public transport, coaches, car sharing, and the provision and control of car parking. The Plan shall identify a co-ordinator and point of contact for the purpose of the plan. The Travel Plan shall be carried out as approved. (In the interest of sustainable transport system and in accordance with Policy AM09 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

10. There shall be no live or amplified music or voice played which would be

detrimental to the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties. (In the interests of the amenities of nearby occupiers, and in accordance with policies CL08, H13 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

11. The Centre shall not be used outside the hours of 0800-2230 daily. (In the

interests of the amenities of nearby occupiers, and in accordance with policies PS10, H13 and CL 08 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)




12

12. Before the use is begun, details of the ventilation system shall be submitted to

and agreed in writing with the City Council as Local Planning Authority. and installed only in accordance with the agreed details, and it shall be maintained and operated thereafter to the satisfaction of the City Council as Local Planning Authority. (In the interests of the amenities of nearby occupiers, and in accordance with policies PS10 and BE21of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

13. Except on four occasions duirng the year, there shall be no more than 150

persons within the building at any one time. (In the interests of residential amenity, to avoid highway congestion and noise disturbance to local residnts, in accordance wth policies PS10, H13, CL08 and AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan)

14. No marriage ceremonies shall occur within the building. (In the interests of

highway safety and residential amenity and in accordance with policies PS10, H13 and CL08 of the City of Leicester Local Plan).

15. There shall be no external amplified call to prayer or aural announcement of

activities to take place or taking place within the buildings without the prior submission of details to and approval by the City Council as local planning authority. (In the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with policies H13, CL08 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

16. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes)

Order 1987, the premises shall only be used as a community centre and place of worship and not for any other uses falling within Class D1. (The City Council would wish to give separate consideration to other uses, having regard to the implications for traffic generation and local amenity)

NOTES FOR APPLICANT 1. Apart from the demolition of outbuildings, no permission is granted or implied for

alterations to the external appearance of the property, for which a separate planning permission may be required.

2. With regard to condition 10 regarding the Travel Plan please contact Bal Minhas

in the Highway Authority on 0116 252 7523. 3. REASON FOR APPROVAL. In the view of the City Council, the proposal

complies with the relevant criteria in the City of Leicester Local Plan policies listed in this decision, and there are no material considerations which outweigh these policies. The City Council considers that any harm to residential amenity and in respect of traffic can be overcome by the attached conditions.

Policies relating to this recommendation 2006_CL08 The development or extension of community, education, sports and

leisure facilities are normally subject to access and amenity considerations.




13

2006_H13 Planning permission not granted for non-residential uses within existing and proposed Primarily Residential Areas unless certain criteria can be met.

2006_PS10 Criteria will be used to assess planning applications which concern the

amenity of existing or proposed residents. 2006_AM11 Proposals for parking provision for non-residential development should

not exceed the maximum standards specified in Appendix 01. 2006_AM01 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of

pedestrians and people with disabilities are incorporated into the design and routes are as direct as possible to key destinations.

2006_AM02 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of cyclists

have been incorporated into the design and new or improved cycling routes should link directly and safely to key destinations.

2006_AM09 Proposals for large-scale or travel intensive development must be

accompanied by a Transport Assessment and a Travel Plan. 2006_BE21 Noise-generating development not permitted if affecting unacceptably

amenity of noise-sensitive land uses; noise-sensitive development not permitted if affected by noise from noise-generating land uses.

Recommendation: Refusal

20072152 17A DUXBURY ROAD, MASJID-AL-HUSAYN MOSQUE

Proposal: WORKS TO FOUR LIME TREES AND FOUR PLANES (T1-T8) PROTECTED BY TREE PRESERVATION ORDER NO. 352

Applicant: MR RANJANI

App type: Control of works to protected trees

Status: Other development

Expiry Date: 9 January 2008

ZF WARD: Coleman

Introduction The application was deferred at your last meeting to allow officers to negotiate an amended scheme. The trees stand in a narrow, doubly fenced, strip of land between the car park serving the mosque and Bridge Road and are up to 20 metres high. Background Consent was granted for the use of the site as a place of worship in 2002 (20020372).




14

The Proposal The proposal involves works to four lime trees and four planes protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 352. The work would involve cutting back all the branches over the carriageway and to cut branches lower than 5.5 metres over the footway and the mosque premises. The stated reasons for the proposal are that there have been complaints about the trees from neighbours on Bridge Road, falling branches have damaged cars and the trees are overgrown and dangerous. However, no evidence has been forwarded in support. Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report. There are no specific policies or guidelines in the current Local Plan relating to trees that are protected but by definition, there is a presumption in favour of their retention wherever possible. Policy UD06 requires that new development should not impinge upon landscape features that have amenity value whether they are within or outside the site unless it can meet criteria. Further information and guidance for tree protection measures during development processes is contained in the City Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance on Tree Protection adopted in October 2003.

BARNABAS ROAD

DUXBURY ROAD

BRIDGE ROAD

49

63

69

39

17

16

9

19

60

44

30

Centre

Mosque

20

30

57

67

54

Mosque

18

37

17

27

47

13

15

27

14

24

34

44





15

Representations One petition has been received with 11 signatures in support of the proposed works. Councillor Draycott has requested the application be referred to your committee. She states that residents would welcome the works on the grounds of highway safety. At the meeting, Councillor Draycott stated that when the trees are in foliage the canopies of the trees because they are so large overshadow the residential properties on the other side and compromise their residential amenity. Consideration I consider the proposed works would spoil the naturalistic form of the trees, and its severity would be such that the trees’ vigour would be reduced and they would be left susceptible to decay fungus infection and decline. There would be no benefit gained from the works; lopping the trees would not stop falling branches, it would make the trees weaker and increase problems in the long term. I will report my findings in respect of an amended scheme should it be submitted to your committee. I therefore recommend REFUSAL for the following reasons: REASONS FOR REFUSAL 1. The trees are prominently located, of good form, in good condition and of high

amenity value in the area. To cut them back as proposed would spoil their shape, reduce their vigour and leave them susceptible to infection and decline.

NOTES FOR APPLICANT 1. Any branch tips over the footway may be cut back by the minimum required to

allow the free passage of pedestrians, and any branch tips over the carriageway may be cut back to allow the passage of the tallest vehicle likely to be encountered. This would not require consent under the Tree Preservation Order, but it could be carried out using small hand tools such as secateurs.

Policies relating to this recommendation None




16


20072213 10-12 FAIRFAX ROAD

Proposal:

THREE/FOUR STOREY BLOCK OF 30 APARTMENTS (30 X 1-BED); ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING (RESERVED MATTERS ) (CLASS C3)

Applicant: SYCAMORE DEVELOPMENTS

App type: Application for reserved matters approval


Expiry Date: 22 February 2008

SB1 WARD: Rushey Mead

Introduction The application site is a former industrial building, currently being demolished, with a yard and outbuildings on the corner part of the site. The site includes three advertisement hoardings owned by J C Decaux which face Barkby Road and a car port and drive owned by 61 Barkby Road. These are included because they formed part of the outline application but neither is proposed to be developed within this application. The advertisement hoardings have been in this location since the 1950s and appear to have deemed consent. The overall site area is 0.2ha, The mainline railway is on the opposite side of Barkby road, on an embankment. There are commercial properties opposite on Fairfax road; other surrounding uses are mainly residential but with some employment uses. The site is within an area allocated for primarily residential use in the Local Plan.




17

Background Residential development was given outline approval in December 2005 (051970) with all matters reserved. Because the site area is less than 0.5ha, it fell within the category of a minor application at the outline stage and therefore was below the affordable housing could not be required. The issues which can be considered as part of this application comprise layout, access, scale, appearance and landscaping, as set out in condition 2 of the outline permission. Issues relating to the amount of amenity space, open/play space contributions, energy, flood risk, archaeology and density cannot be considered as they were not conditioned at the outline stage. The Proposal The development would take the form of an L-shaped block facing Barkby and Fairfax roads, with amenity space and parking to the rear and a vehicle access from Fairfax road. The materials would be brick, render and timber cladding. The height of the blocks would be three storeys next to the adjacent residential properties, increasing to 4 storeys at the corner. The development would be set back from the building line on Barkby Road because of the presence of the advertisement hoardings. The main access to the flats would be from the rear, but some flats would have their own front door facing the street. The original plans set the buildings back from both street frontages, and proposed 7 parking spaces in front of the Fairfax road block, at the back of the pavement. Following negotiations, amended plans have been submitted which omit these parking spaces and bring the Fairfax road block forward to follow the building line. The plans have also been amended to remove the fence on the Barkby road side behind the hoardings, and the parking and amenity space at the rear are re-arranged to give an increased amount of amenity space. The trees on the corner of the site are indicated to be retained. Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report. Further guidance on design, minimum distances and effect on amenity of neighbouring properties is contained in the approved ‘Design Guide for House Extensions’ and the draft Residential Amenity SPG. Guidance on parking standards is included in Appendix 1 of the Local Plan (Vehicle Parking Standards). In zone 4, 1 parking space for a 1-bedroom flat and 2 spaces for a 2 or more bedroom flat would be required. However a reduction may be considered if the property is within 250m of a main bus route. Consultations Local Highway Authority – no objections to the amended plans subject to conditions




18

Representations

Two letters of objection have been received plus a representation from the Cromwell Residents Association and a further representation form a resident. The grounds of objection are as follows:

• Loss of daylight to gardens and back rooms for adjacent houses on Barkby road;

• Loss of privacy for adjacent houses on Barkby road;

• Height of building is overpowering – loss of outlook;

• Inadequate parking;

• Increased traffic will lead to increased highway danger

• Noise arising form the flats

• Probable refuse disposal problems

• Is an overdevelopment of site

The Cromwell Residents Association supports the application in principle provided there is a high boundary fence adjacent to 14 Fairfax Road, maintenance of the communal areas and the future of the advertising hoardings is clarified, and provided there are higher fences generally to protect privacy,

The representation from the resident welcomes the development in principle but is concerned about loss of security to adjacent properties, possible loss of adjacent outbuildings (not a material planning consideration), and light disturbance.

Consideration Design and appearance

The surrounding area is of mixed styles and ages and the contemporary design is appropriate. The vertical emphasis reflects the width of the adjacent terraced houses on Barkby road. The building line is staggered and the roof line is varied. The increase in height gives a focal point at the corner. I consider that the design is satisfactory. The density, at 30 units on 0.2ha, is high but is not in itself unacceptable in this urban location provided other aspects are satisfactory. The hoardings prevent an active street frontage to Barkby road but the design caters for their removal in the future to allow street access if such an opportunity ever arises. However the presence of the advertisement hoardings makes if difficult to achieve a wholly satisfactory design – apart from the less active street frontage, the building is set back behind the building line, which reduces its presence on the corner. Should the hoardings ever be removed, a strip of amenity space would remain which is not of any practical use to residents and is likely to be a trap for litter. In this situation a wall




19

or boundary fence could enclose the land within the site; however this in itself would not be a satisfactory streetscape solution. Residential amenity The side elevations of the proposed building do not extend beyond those of the adjacent properties, and no 45-degree lines would be intersected. I do not consider that there would be any significant loss of light, or outlook to adjacent residents. The windows at the rear are far enough away from existing properties to avoid overlooking. Facing windows are 25m from the nearest property on Fairfax Road and 38m from the nearest property on Barkby Road. Boundary treatments would be dealt with by condition. Lighting would be low level for example via bollards. I consider that the flats would be a sufficient distance from adjacent properties to ensure that noise is not a significant problem. Amenity of the occupiers Flat size and layout are acceptable, but the outlook from some of the ground floor and first floor flats on the Barkby Road side is compromised by the presence of three large hoardings. The room layout on this side is reversed so that bedroom windows face the street and living rooms face the amenity space and car park. The situation would also be improved by the applicant’s undertaking to remove the fence, which is believed to be in their ownership. Alternative layouts which would avoid principal room windows overlooking the hoardings – for example by constructing the blocks at right angles to the street – would not be acceptable in terms of street scene and impact on neighbouring properties. The area of amenity space is approximately 240 sq m, which exceeds the 5sqm per flat recommended in the residential amenity guide. The space is appropriately located and is acceptable.

Trees - The trees on the corner are indicated to be retained. However due to their proximity to the development it is unlikely that this will be possible. I have no objection to their removal provided the landscaping scheme provides for an adequate number of replacements

Traffic and Parking - the SPG ‘Vehicle Parking Standards’ requires a maximum off-street car parking provision of 30 spaces. Seven of the spaces originally proposed, those at the back of pavement on Fairfax road, were removed from the scheme on the grounds of highway safety. The amended plans would provide 25 spaces, which is acceptable if the spaces are not allocated to specific units. The access is satisfactory. Conclusion - the attainment of a more satisfactory development is hampered by the presence of the advertisement hoardings, which is detrimental both to the positioning of the development on the site and to the amenity of the occupiers of some of the flats. However, I am not aware of any situation which would suggest that the hoardings are likely to be removed in the foreseeable future. Bearing this in mind, a refusal is likely to result in the site remaining undeveloped and semi-derelict. I recommend APPROVAL subject to the following conditions:




20

CONDITIONS 1. START RESERVED MATTERS IN 2 YEARS 2. Before the development is begun, samples of the materials to be used on all

external elevations and roofs shall be agreed in writing between the applicant and the City Council as local planning authority. (In the interests of visual amenity, and in accordance with policies H07 and BE06 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

3. The ground, first and second floor bathroom windows to the north elevation

adjacent to 61 Barkby Road shall be fitted with obscure glazing and shall be retained as such. (In the interest of residential amenity and in accordance with policies H07 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan).

4. Before the development commences, details shall be submitted to and agreed in

writing with the City Council as local planning authority which show the location of the bin storage areas. (In the interests of the satisfactory development of the site and in accordance with policy H12 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

5. Before the development authorised by this permission is begun, a detailed

landscaping scheme showing the treatment of all parts of the site which will remain unbuilt upon shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority. This scheme shall include details of: (i) the position and spread of all existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be retained or removed; (ii) new tree and shrub planting, including plant type, size, quantities and locations; (iii) means of planting, staking, and tying of trees, including tree guards; (iv) other surface treatments; (v) fencing and boundary treatments, including the treatment of the front forecourts on Fairfax Road; (vi) any changes in levels; (vii) the position and depth of service and/or drainage runs (which may affect tree roots). The approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out within one year of completion of the development. For a period of not less than ten years from the date of planting, the applicant or owners of the land shall maintain all planted material. This material shall be replaced if it dies, is removed or becomes seriously diseased. The replacement planting shall be completed in the next planting season in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme. (In the interests of amenity, and in accordance with policy UD06 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

6. Before any part of the development is occupied, the existing fence to the west

(Barkby Road) boundary shall be removed, and details of the replacement boundary treatment shall be agreed in wirting with the City Council as local planning authority and shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details before any part of the development is occupied, and shall be retained as such. (In the interest of the amenity of occupiers of the flats and in accordance with policy H07 of the City of Leicester Local Plan).

7. The development shall not be occupied until the footway crossings have been

altered to the satisfaction of the City Council as local planning authority. (To




21

achieve a satisfactory means of access to the highway, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)


direction, shall be kept available within the site. (In the interests of highway safety, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

9. 2 metre by 2 metre sight lines on each side of the vehicular access shall be

provided at the time of development and shall be retained. (In the interests of the safety of pedestrians and other road users, and in accordance with policies H12 and AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

10. Before the development is begun, details of a security gate to serve the parking

areashall be agreed in writing with City Council as local planning authority. The gate shall be set back a minimum of 5m from the back of pavement and shall be provided in accordance with the other agreed details prior to the commencement of the use of the parking area and shall be retained as such. (In the interests of amenity and security and in accordance with policy PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

11. The parking spaces shown on the approved plans shall be provided at the time of

development and shall be retained. (To secure adequate off-street parking provision, and in accordance with policy AM12 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

12. Before the first unit is occupied, a minimum of 16 secure and sheltered cycle

parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the site. Furthermore, a minimum of 2 secure and sheltered parking spaces for Powered Two Wheelers shall be provided within the curtilage of the site. (In the interest of the satisfactory development of the site and in accordance with policies AM02 and AM12 of the City of Leicester Local Plan)

13. The access drive shall be surfaced with tarmacadam, concrete or similar hard

bound material (not loose aggregate) for a distance of at least 5 metres behind the Highway boundary. (To ensure the satisfactory development of the site and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan)

14. Before the development commences, a scheme for the provision and

implementation of surface water run-off limitation shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the City Council as local planning authority. The details shall show how the development attenuates storm water run-off in accordance with the appropriate Environment Agency run-off rates. (In the interests of sustainabilty and to prevent increased risk of flooding, in accordance with policy BE18 of the City of Leicester Local Plan)

15. This consent shall relate solely to the amended plans received by the City

Council as local planning authority on 24 January 2008 (For the avoidance of doubt.)

NOTES FOR APPLICANT




22

1. The appllicant may wish to discuss a suitable height for this boundary with the

occupier of 14 Fairfax Road. The applicant is advised that the provisions of the Party Wall Etc Act 1994 may apply to this boundary.

2. Because of the reduction in their number, the non-disabled parking spaces

should be retained as communal and not allocated to specific units. 3. REASON FOR APPROVAL (IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLAN) Policies relating to this recommendation 2006_H07 Criteria for the development of new flats and the conversion of existing

buildings to self-contained flats. 2006_H12 Planning permission normally granted for housing within the Primarily

Residential Areas shown on Proposals Map. 2006_UD01 Planning permission granted for sustainable high quality building

designs providing proposals take into consideration criteria. 2006_UD02 Planning permission will be given for new development where

buildings make a positive contribution to the street scene and create a sense of identity.

2006_UD06 New development should not impinge upon landscape features that

have amenity value whether they are within or outside the site unless it can meet criteria.


amenity of existing or proposed residents. 2006_AM01 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of




2006_AM12 Levels of car parking for residential development will be determined in

accordance with the standards in Appendix 01. 2006_BE21 Noise-generating development not permitted if affecting unacceptably





23


20072228 WELFORD ROAD, AYLESTONE ROAD, LEICESTER RUGBY FOOTBALL CLUB

Proposal:

REDEVELOPMENT OF RUGBY STADIUM, ANCILLARY SUPPORTER AND CONFERENCE FACILITIES; HOTEL; MULTI - STOREY CAR PARK, VEHICULAR ACCESS AND NEW COLLEGE BUILDING (OUTLINE) (SECTION 278 AGREEMENT)

Applicant: LEICESTER RUGBY FOOTBALL CLUB

App type: Operational development - full application



AP WARD: Castle

Introduction The site sits between Aylestone Road and Welford Road, on the southern edge of the City Centre. It contains the Leicester Tigers Rugby Ground, together with its parking area to the north, and the former Fosse Day Centre site to the southwest of the stadium. The Tigers’ ground is a 17,400 capacity stadium. Each stand has been designed and built independently of the others over a period of 90 years. There are some temporary office buildings between the north stand and Aylestone Road. To the south west of the site is an area of terraced housing. Those fronting Aylestone Road are generally 3-storey (no.73 is a Grade II Listed Building), with houses further




24

west being 2-storey. The nearest houses are 32m from the site. Further to the west, along Walnut Street, are several blocks of flats, ranging up to 10 storeys high. To the northeast is Nelson Mandela Park, a recreation ground of about 1.6ha, containing a sports pitch, children's play area, public toilets and some semi-mature woodland. Tigers Way (formerly Waterloo Way) skirts the park to the east and forms a junction with Welford Road immediately adjacent to the site. To the southeast is an employment area: the nearest premises are a builders merchants. Behind these and alongside Tigers Way is a railway embankment, beyond which is Welford Road Cemetery, a Grade II listed Park and Garden of Historical Interest. This is set on higher ground and offers extensive views over the southern part of the City Centre, including the site. On the north-eastern side of Nelson Mandela Park is an area of mainly two-storey terrace housing, which is within the New Walk Conservation Area. The nearest housing in this area is about 210m away from the site. Background The former Granby Halls site, to the north of the application site, is currently being used as a car park. Consent was first granted on 17 April 2001 (application 20010211), some months after the demolition of Granby Halls. This consent has been extended previously and a further planning application is currently being considered to extend the time period again. Planning consent was given in November 2005 (20031653) for a new spectator stand with 8 storey buildings at the sides, containing ancillary administrative, hospitality, spectator and player facilities (Class D2); Leisure Club (Class D2); 24 Flats (Class C3) (22x2 bed and 2x3 bed); Retail Floorspace (Class A1); Bar (Class A3); Ancillary Car Parking in semi-basement; and External Concourse. The primary business of the current stadium is as a premiership rugby football club. However the stadium also provides conferencing and banqueting facilities, meeting rooms and rooms for smaller celebrations, interviews or private business lunches. These are all available for hire on non-match days. The ground contains a clubhouse and club store, ancillary offices, kitchens, press area, changing rooms and medical facilities. The Proposal This proposal includes a full planning application for the phased redevelopment of the entire rugby stadium with ancillary supporter and conferencing facilities, a 450 space multi-storey car park and a 3 to 4 star hotel with 175 beds. The application also includes an outline proposal for a new college building to expand and improve the existing facilities at Leicester College. The application has been accompanied by: - Planning Statement; Design and Access Statement; Transport Assessment; Wind Microclimate Desk Study;




25

Townscape Appraisal Report; Arboricultural Implications Report; Archaeological Desk-based Assessment; Desktop geo-environmental Assessment; Bat and ecological survey; Noise Assessment; Socio-economic Impact Assessment; Sustainability Assessment; Sustainability and Renewable Energy Report; Statement of community consultation. Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report. Local Plan Designations. Adopted Local Plan: The site is allocated for Community, Education and Leisure use, with the nearby terrace housing being in Primarily Residential Areas. Nelson Mandela Park and Welford Road Cemetery are allocated as green space. The whole of the former Granby Halls site is a Potential Development Area, with ‘priority’ and ‘other’ uses sought including expansion space for the rugby ground, community facilities and residential. The rugby ground and the LRI are now zoned for Community, Education and Leisure use. The commercial site to the south east is a Primarily Employment Area. Supplementary Planning Guidance. Vehicle Parking Standards (September 2002): Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in New Developments SPG (August 2002) Tall Buildings SPG Consultations

Environment Agency (EA)

Although the Agency has no concerns in principle to the proposals there are concerns regarding the surface water drainage and the proposal that surface water run off will be into the sewer system. The Agency has therefore requested a full Flood Risk Assessment to be submitted to demonstrate that surface water can be adequately dealt with without causing a flood risk. Subject to the Flood Risk Assessment the Agency are proposing 5 conditions be attached to any approval of development on this site.

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE)

CABE were unable to comment within the timescale given.




26

Local Highway Authority (LHA) The LHA consider the Transport Assessment as submitted to be unacceptable and have asked for additional information with regard to modal splits for those attending the stadium and conferencing facilities, amended trip generation nformation to compare the vehicular movements of other similar development in the country and numerous other questions to clarify and assess the highway impact of the new proposed 30,000 capacity stadium. Plans have also been requested to show the technical requirements of vehicles entering and leaving the site and proposed vehicular access along Aylestone Walk. The LHA have substantial concerns regarding the use of and overhang of Aylestone Walk, an adopted public highway. The LHA is at present objecting to the application. Leicestershire Constabulary: The Crime Reduction Officer has made comments relating to the stadium, hotel and multi-storey car park in relation to lighting and use of reflective surfaces, vehicular entry/exit, parking areas, pedestrian routes, lifts, and stairways. These have been passed onto the applicants and amendment to the proposals will take account of these comments. Comments have also been received on counter terrorism issues. The stadium is considered to be a soft target and consideration should therefore be made to protection against terrorism. The comments of the Counter Terrorism Officer have also been passed to the applicant. The applicant has had a separate meeting with the Counter Terrorism Officer to consider what measures can be included within the stadium design and around the perimeter of the stadium. Better Buildings A biomass boiler is proposed and it offers the potential for acceptable levels of provision for renewables. Though the north stand, at a predicted 9.1% falls short of the 11% requirement this improves as the further phases of the development proceed. A condition is proposed to ensure this provision. Service Director for Environmental Services Pollution – have asked what impact do the applicants estimate that this increased vehicular activity will have on annual mean levels of nitrogen dioxide. I am awaiting a response on this matter. Land contamination – no objections. Noise – conditions have been requested relating to the carrying out of the demolition and construction to restrict hours of work to 07.30-18.00 Monday to Friday; 07.30-13.00 on Saturday and no working on Sundays and Public Holidays. Emergency working outside of these times would have to be agreed with the City Council.




27

It is recommended that good practice be adopted by the applicant in terms of the Public Address System by using smaller speakers and ensuring that they are orientated to retain the majority of noise within the stadium. Severn Trent Water No objections subject to the inclusion of 2 recommended conditions relating to disposal of surface water and foul sewage and the location of buildings in relation to public sewers that cross the site. Sport England No objections. Corporate Director of Resources and Town Clerk The applicant is purchasing the former Fosse Day Centre site. The purchase cannot conclude as the proposed new vehicular access from Aylestone Road extends along Aylestone Walk to an unacceptable length. The relevant legislation restricts vehicular access over an adopted footway to 15 yards and the proposal extends 30 yards along Aylestone Walk. The applicants is looking at an alternative access arrangement to serve the proposed hotel and multi-storey car park. Amended plans are expected and the details of those will be reported to your committee. Concern is raised over the concourse area stated as a requirement between the stadium and any development proposed on the former Granby Halls site. The draft supplementary planning guidance prepared for the Granby Halls site states the requirement of a 24m wide concourse area. The proposed stadium is within 6m of the boundary at the closest point and there is concern that the remaining18m will be required to be provided on the Granby Hall site restricting development. Representations I have received 193 letters and e-mails in favour of the proposal. I have also received 5 letters/e-mails of objection. The grounds of objection are:

• The views of the pitch for disabled fans will be very restricted.

• The design of the stadium overwhelms the area.

• Insufficient parking is proposed requiring fans travelling by car to still park on street in nearby residential area.

Consideration

Design and Urban Design College Building




28

The information submitted for the new college building is indicative only as this is an outline application for this building, however what has been shown will relate well to the proposed hotel and the existing college buildings. The Stadium Context The proposed new stadium will relate to neighbouring hospital and college buildings in terms of scale and height. It will be larger in scale than the 2-3 storey residential properties opposite on Aylestone Road but the west stand will sweep down to a lower height at this point. The folded curved roof and truss over the north stand will provide a dramatic, distinctive landmark on this main route into the city, which will improve the visual character of the locality. Site The proposed new stadium as an significant building requires the external space in front of it in order for it to be viewed and appreciated by the city. The west sides of the stadium will be viewed from Nelson Mandela Park through a tree lined boundary. The view of the east side of the stadium will be more restricted as Aylestone Road is enclosed by residential and the hospital buildings. I am concerned that there is only a 6m strip of land to the north of the north stand, which is the principle elevation and front door to the stadium. The concourse between the Stadium and the development on the former Granby Halls site should be of sufficient size as to allow for views of this proposed significant building, to accommodate people accessing the stadium on match days and for the cycle route. In order that the concourse does not appear as a narrow tunnel and there is an appropriate building height to space depth ratio I consider there should be a minimum of 24m between the north stadium and a future building on the Granby Halls site. This could in design terms be accommodated with the future development of the Granby Halls site. The view of the south stand will be restricted by the proposed hotel, multi-storey car park and college building. Aylestone Walk along the southern edge of the stadium will feel very enclosed as the new stand will overhang by 2m at the second floor level and 5m at upper terrace level. The multi–storey car park on the other edge of the path will be 13 – 15m high and only 3m from the stadium at the upper level. I think Aylestone Walk will feel unsafe, particularly at night, and I suggest that this public right of way and cycle route is diverted to a concourse on the north side of the stadium. This of course has highway implications requiring the stopping up of Aylestone Walk, the provision of acceptable alternative provision and their adoption as public highway. These are legal processes that would be undertaken separate from the planning process. The entrances and windows at regular intervals around the stadium facing the streets and the concourse will ensure vitality and visual surveillance of the public realm.




29

Building Design The overall proportion and composition of the stadium roof is flowing and elegant. This roof should remain uncluttered. The flood lighting to the pitch is incorporated into the stadium roof. The stadium walls have a good proportion of glazing area and the horizontal emphasis works well visually. The materials and colours are well chosen in relation to the buildings context and reflect the rugby team’s colours. The Hotel Context The proposed building will relate well to the proposed neighbouring new stadium in terms of mass and scale. Site The proposed building is positioned on the site to address the street, which works well. The main entrance, lobby, lounge, bar and restaurant windows facing the street will ensure vitality and visual surveillance of the public realm. The footpath on the Aylestone Road frontage appears wide enough to allow for some tree planting. Building Design The overall proportions and composition of the elevations are well conceived. The horizontal emphasis is counterbalanced by the vertical curved wall leading to the entrance. The materials and colours are well chosen in relation to the buildings context. Amended plans are expected showing a vehicular access from Aylestone Road through the ground floor of the hotel to service the hotel and the multi-storey car park. At the time of writing this report the plans had not been received. I will comment in the addendum report on their acceptability in terms of design or highway implications. Car Park Context The proposed multi-storey car park will relate well to the proposed hotel and college building. Site The proposed building is lower than the proposed hotel and college building and will be behind these buildings so will not be visible from Aylestone Road. It will be partly visible from Welford Road.




30

Building Design This building will probably be built before the hotel and college building therefore a visually pleasing elevational treatment is expected. The square panelling with a rotating pattern is interesting. Amended plans are expected showing a smaller footprint for the proposed car park and the addition of an extra floor. Again at the time of writing this report the plans had not been received. I will comment in the addendum report on their acceptability in terms of design or highway implications. Inclusive Access and Design The key document for inclusive access is ‘Accessible Stadia - Sports Grounds and Stadia Guide no.1’. It defines the standards of facilities expected to be delivered in the 21st century. The applicant has been requested to provide more information about how the proposals meet the standards set out in this guidance. A planning condition has been proposed to ensure access for disabled people. I welcome the statement that the hotel and college will be "fully accessible". More information is needed on how external spaces will be designed to create inclusive environments in line with current guidance. This should include measures to meet the needs of visually impaired people (including tactile paving at crossings, providing clear colour contrast, and avoiding shiny stainless steel). These matters can be dealt with within the requirement of the landscaping condition which requires details of all hard landscaping. Existing Tigers Building The city archaeologist requests a recording of the older stands be carried out before they are demolished. The stone plaque dated 1909, on the building on Welford Road, should be retained.

Trees

There are five trees on the site protected by TPO N4.371 (these are numbered T8 – T12 on the TPO and T1 – T5 on the applicant’s arboricultural survey). The proposal involves the removal of four of those trees. Although the removal of these TPO trees would be regrettable, their retention would not be practicable without making significant changes to the scheme, which may not be welcome in other respects. I agree that there will not be sufficient space within the development site to accommodate replacement trees. Details have been submitted of the proposed protection methods for the TPO tree, and for one other non-TPO tree to be retained. Ecology No bats were found in the bat survey. All the buildings were assessed as being of low potential, and there is no further need for surveys of the buildings.




31

There is some bat roost potential in the three hybrid Black Poplars, two of which are proposed for removal and the remaining one for tree works (unspecified in the report). The bat surveyors were unable to assess the trees - specialist equipment was needed for a proper inspection. This survey work on the 3 trees has now been carried out and I am waiting for the results to be submitted. I will report further on this matter at your committee. Highways The LHA have requested additional information to be included in an amended Transport Assessment and technical drawings of the proposed vehicular access and use of Aylestone Walk. At the time of writing this report this information had not been received. I will report further on this matter to your committee. Subsequent approvals will be required from the LHA under the Highways Act including a s278 agreement. The applicant has stated that the issues relating to the status of Aylestone Walk as an adopted public footpath can be dealt with under s257 of the Town and Country Planning Act. This proposal is being investigated further. Flood Risk The Environment Agency comments on the requested Flood Risk Assessment had not been received at the time of writing this report. I will report further on this matter to your committee. Conclusion The importance of this development for the City of Leicester is recognised and I am working closely with the Club and their agents to meet the requirements of all concerned. The proposal is acceptable subject to the receipt of acceptable amended plans and a satisfactory conclusion to the concerns of the Local Highway Authority and Environment Agency. I recommend that the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS

1. Application for approval of reserved matters for the new college building shall be made within 3 years from the date of this permission and the development shall be begun not later than: (a) Five years from the date of this permission; or (b) if later, two years from the date of the final approval of all the reserved matters. (To comply with Section 92 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.)

2. Detailed plans and particulars of the scale, appearance, and the landscaping of

the site of the new college building (referred to in Condition 1 as reserved matters) shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council as local planning authority before the development is begun and shall have regard to: (a) the size and height of the development including details of the materials to be used on all external elevations and roofs; (b) the provision of necessary footway crossings;




32

(c) a landscaping scheme showing the treatment of all parts of the site to remain unbuilt upon, and including: (i) details of the position and spread of any existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be retained or removed; (ii) any new tree and shrub planting, including plant type, size, quantities and locations; (iii) means of planting, staking and tying of any new trees, including tree guards; (iv) other surface treatments; (v) fencing and boundary treatments; (vi) any changes in levels; (vii) the position and depth of service and/or drainage runs; and shall be carried out as approved. (To secure the satisfactory development of the site.)

3. Before the development of the new college building is begun, a scheme shall be

submitted to and approved by the City Council as local planning authority for the provision of parking for the new college building on the site, and the approved scheme shall be completed before the development is occupied, and shall be retained. (To secure the satisfactory development of the site.)

4. Before the development of the new college building is begun, a scheme shall be

submitted to and approved by the City Council as local planning authority for the provision of cycle parking for the new college building on the site, and the approved scheme shall be completed before the development is occupied, and shall be retained. (To secure the satisfactory development of the site.)

5. The development of the stadium, hotel and multi-storey car park shall be begun

within three years from the date of this permission. (To comply with Section 91 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.)

6. 2 metre by 2 metre sight lines on each side of each vehicular access shall be

provided at the time of development and shall be retained. (In the interests of the safety of pedestrians and other road users, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

7. All streetworks shall be constructed in accordance with the Leicestershire County

Council's 'Highway Requirements for Development'. (To achieve a satisfactory form of development, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

8. Dropped kerbs and ramps, suitable for wheelchairs and prams, shall be provided

at the time of development in the footways at all major pedestrian crossing points, at road junctions, and at footway crossings in accordance with details to be agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority. (For the safety and convenience of pedestrians including disabled people and pram and wheelchair users; and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

9. The development shall not be occupied until any redundant footway crossings

and/or damaged or altered areas of footway or other highway have been reinstated to the satisfaction of the City Council as local planning authority. (For the safety and convenience of pedestrians and other road users, and in accordance with policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)




33

10. Before the development of the stadium, hotel and multi-storey car park is begun details of the design and materials all external elevations, roofs, windows, doors and boundary treatments shall be agreed in writing between the applicant and the City Council as local planning authority. (In the interests of visual amenity, and in accordance with policy UD01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

11. GOOD ARBORICULTURAL PRACTICE 12. All trees on the site or adjacent to it, subject to a Tree Preservation Order, shall

be protected from damage during building operations, in accordance with details to be agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority. (In the interests of amenity, and in accordance with policy GE05 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

13. Before the development is begun, a landscaping scheme showing the treatment

of all parts of the site, including details of all hard landscaping, trees and shrubs to be planted, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority. The approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out within one year of completion of the development. For a period of not less than 10 years from the date of planting, the applicant or owners of the land shall maintain all planted material. This material shall be replaced if it dies, is removed or becomes seriously diseased. The replacement planting shall be completed in the next planting season in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme. (In the interests of amenity, and in accordance with policy UD06 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

14. All vegetation intended for clearance shall be clearly identified on site in

accordance with details to be agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority, before any clearance is begun. (In the interests of amenity, and in accordance with policy GE05 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

15. Before the development is begun, a scheme shall be agreed in writing with the

City Council as local planning authority indicating details of temporary site entrances, temporary storage areas for soil and other materials, and the placing of plant and site huts to be adopted during building operations and shall be implemented. (To ensure the satisfactory development of the site, and in accordance with policy AM17, AM01 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

16. There shall be no live or amplified music or voice played in the bar, gym or shop

which would be detrimental to the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties. (In the interests of the amenities of nearby occupiers, and in accordance with policy PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

17. Space shall be kept available within the curtilage of the site to allow for loading

and unloading always to take place within the site. (In the interests in highway safety, and in accordance with policy AM17 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)


direction, shall be kept available within the site. (In the interests of highway




34

safety, and in accordance with policy AM01 and AM17 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

19. The development is to comply with Accessible Stadia - sports grounds and stadia

guide no.1`. A detailed Access Statement demonstrating this shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority before the development is begun. (To ensure accessibility for disabled staff and visitors and in accordance with Policy AM01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan).

20. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until drainage plans for

the disposal of surface water and foul sewage have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in acordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use. (To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce the risk of creating or exacerbating a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution).

21. There are public sewers, which cross the site. No building shall be erected or

trees planted within 6.0 metres or the 900mm public surface water sewer and within 3.0 metres of the 375mm public foul sewer unless a Building Over Approval is obtained from Severn Trent Water to divert the sewer in accordance with Section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991. (To maintain essential access for maintainance, repair, renewal and to protect the structural integrity of the public sewerage system).

22. Before the development has begun the further proposed investigation of the fill

material present at the site investigation shall be undertaken in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing with the City Council as local planning authority. (To protect surface and groundwater quality in the area).

23. Soakaways shall only be used in areas where contamination is not present. If

permitted their location must be submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Plannign Authority. (To protect groundwater quality in the area).

24. If during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be

present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a Method Statement and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority. This Method Statement must details how the unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. (To protect surface and groundwater quality in the area).

25. The use of the club shop premises shall be restricted to use as a shop and

ancillary storage, being a use within Class A1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. (For the avoidance of doubt.)

26. The source of illumination for the stadium floodlights shall be arranged so that it

is not visible from the highway. (To prevent glare in the interests of highway safety.)




35

27. Before the use is begun details of the ventilation systems for all restaurant/hot food facilities within the stadium shall be submitted to and agreed with the City Council as Local Planning Authority and installed as shown on the approved plans and it shall be maintained and operated thereafter to the satisfaction of the City Council as Local Planning Authority. The ventilation ducting shall be contained within the envelope of the building as approved. (In the interests of visual amenity and the amenities of nearby occupiers, and in accordance with policies UD01 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

28. Travel Plans shall be submitted for the rugby stadium including conferencing

facilities and the hotel in writing to the City Council as local planning authority before the first occupation of any part of those buildings, and shall be carried out as agreed. The Travel Plans shall: -

(a) identify modal slpits, proposals, targets, objectivess, time scales and monitoring techniques to encourage the use of non-car means to travel to and from the scheme;

(b) include provision for monitoring travel modes and patterns at regular intevals, for a minimum of ten years from the first occupation of any part of the scheme;

(c) identify a person as coordinator and point of contact for the purpose of the Plan; and

(d) identify a traffic management strategy for any goods collection facility for customers operated within the scheme. (In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety, sustainability and general amenity in accordance with Policies AM01, AM02, AM05 and AM09 of the City of Leicester Local Plan).

NOTES FOR APPLICANT 1. REASON FOR APPROVAL. In the view of the City Council, the proposal

complies with the relevant criteria in the City of Leicester Local Plan policies listed in this decision, and with Supplementary Planning Guidance, and there are no material considerations which outweigh these policies. The City Council considers that any harm to residential amenity can be overcome by the attached conditions.

2. NO CONSENT FOR ADVERTISEMENTS 3. The works required to the adopted highway will require the submission of a

seperate application under s278 of the Highways Act for approval by the Local Highway Authority.

Policies relating to this recommendation 2006_AM01 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of


2006_AM02 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of cyclists have been incorporated into the design and new or improved cycling routes should link directly and safely to key destinations.




36

2006_AM05 Planning permission for large scale development will not be granted unless provision is made for access to and for bus routes.

2006_AM09 Proposals for large-scale or travel intensive development must be

accompanied by a Transport Assessment and a Travel Plan. 2006_AM11 Proposals for parking provision for non-residential development should

not exceed the maximum standards specified in Appendix 01. 2006_AM13 When a number of users occupy a single site, development proposals

should take account of the opportunities for communal and shared parking provision.

2006_AM14 In the Central Commercial Zone, additional contract and public car

parking which is not associated with new development, will not be permitted.

2006_AM15 Location and design of new parking provision should be subject to

safety and design criteria. 2006_AM17 Non-residential development will, where practical, be expected to

include loading and unloading facilities and manoeuvring space within the site.

2006_BE01 The City’s archaeological heritage will be preserved where

appropriate. 2006_BE16 Planning permission will be granted for the development of renewable

energy installations where local impacts are not outweighed by wider benefits. Major developments must realise their potential for incorporating renewable energy technologies.

2006_BE17 Planning permission will be granted for infrastructure associated with

combined heat and power schemes where local impacts are not outweighed by wider benefits. Major developments and those within the SRA must source their energy from CHP where feasible.

2006_BE18 New development must implement measures to minimise the impact

on the quality of and flows within the water environment. 2006_BE20 Developments that are likely to create flood risk onsite or elsewhere

will only be permitted if adequate mitigation measures can be implemented.

2006_BE21 Noise-generating development not permitted if affecting unacceptably





37

2006_BE22 Planning permission for development that consists of, or includes, external lighting will be permitted where the City Council is satisfied that it meets certain criteria.

2006_CL08 The development or extension of community, education, sports and

leisure facilities are normally subject to access and amenity considerations.

2006_GE05 The design and layout of development must address the retention,

incorporation, promotion and management of a variety of wildlife habitats.

2006_GE04 Development will not be granted if it harms or damages a habitat

which a protected species relies on unless an overriding interest can be proven.

2006_H17 Planning permission will be granted for hotels, hostels and residential

institutions within Primarily Residential Areas outside Restricted Zones provided criteria can be met.


amenity of existing or proposed residents. 2006_PS11 Control over proposals which have the potential to pollute, and over

proposals which are sensitive to pollution near existing polluting uses; support for alternative fuels etc.

2006_UD01 Planning permission granted for sustainable high quality building



2006_UD03 Planning permission will be granted for development which includes

high quality and imaginative designs for streets and public spaces which meet criteria.

2006_UD04 Planning permission will not be given for development proposals which

would fail sufficiently to achieve efficiency in the use of energy. 2006_UD05 Development proposals should be designed for flexibility with the

future in mind and take into consideration criteria. 2006_UD06 New development should not impinge upon landscape features that

have amenity value whether they are within or outside the site unless it can meet criteria.

2006_UD07 New development and redevelopment should have sufficient refuse

storage space to allow segregated waste collection.




38


20072259 FORMER LINREAD SITE, ABBEY LANE

Proposal: BUILDING FOR SELF-STORAGE (CLASS B8)

Applicant: WETERN RANGE LTD/SAFESTORE PROPERTIES LTD




WJJ WARD: Abbey

Introduction The site is a former industrial site that has been cleared. To the east of the site are the 1920’s/30’s semi-detached houses along Swithland Avenue. To the north and to the west (on the other side of Abbey Lane) are employment uses. To the south, on the other side of Abbey Park Road is Abbey Park. The site is within the Abbey Meadows policy area. Background 20041167 – Redevelopment of site for repair of motor vehicles and car sales – Approved (reserved matters for 19980021). This permission has now expired.




39

20010804 – Buildings for general industrial (Class B2) and warehousing (Class B8) – Approved. This permission has now expired. 19980021 – Redevelopment of site for repair of motor vehicles and car sales (Outline application) – Approved. This permission has now expired. The Proposal The proposal is for a self-storage warehouse of around 7500sqm. The purpose of the use is to provide small-scale storage typically for people moving home. The building would be of a plain box like design that is typical of modern buildings for such uses. It would be 12m high. The external facing materials would be a mixture of brick and metal cladding. The warehouse would have four floors that would be occupied by storage crates. The site would be accessed off a road to the north of the site which connects to Abbey Lane. Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan (CLLP) policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report. The site lies within the Abbey Meadows Intervention Area. Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (Adopted April 2007). Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) – Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. SPG – Parking Standards. Consultations Highways – No objections subject to conditions. Leicester Regeneration Company (LRC) – Do not object to the proposed use. Pollution (Land) – No objections. Pollution (Noise) – No objections in principle however due to noise from vehicle movement and employees working recommend that hours of use be limited. Representations Letters received seem to refer to both this application and the application for the offices and flats on the neighbouring site (20062260). 18 objections have been received on the grounds of:

• loss of privacy

• loss of light

• noise from the new units

• noise from additional traffic going in and out of site




40

• insufficient parking

• the road junction is already dangerous – new accesses to the site and increased traffic may make it more so

• foundations of houses may be damaged by work

• value of houses may drop

• the new location of the bus stop may be inconvenient to bus users

• the properties along Swithland Avenue may be more vulnerable to crime

• the warehouse may be a fire hazard to neighbouring houses

• fumes from vehicles visiting the site, gas boilers, etc, may reduce air quality, there is no need for more offices and flats in this area

• storage units should be located on an industrial estate

1 letter of support on the following grounds:

• the development is an exciting design that will help regenerate this part of Leicester

• given that the properties along Swithland Avenue overlook each other the overlooking from the proposed development is not significant.

Consideration Principle of development The site lies within the Riverside West Area of the Abbey Meadows policy area. The SPD suggests that the site should be used for uses complementary to the Science Park Area within the Abbey Meadows policy area. I believe the proposal is acceptable in principle. Amenity The purpose of the self-storage warehouse is to provide small-scale storage typically for people moving home. Vehicles visiting such uses tend to be cars, vans and small lorries. The applicants have stated that they do not wish to use the development for other uses within the B8 use class (storage & distribution) and would accept a condition to this effect. Other uses within the B8 use class could result in a large number of heavy goods vehicles visiting the site on a regular basis. This could cause traffic problems in the area and unreasonable levels of noise for the residents of Swithland Avenue. I therefore recommend a condition is attached limiting the use to self-storage only. The properties along Swithland Avenue are presently subject to a significant amount of noise generated by traffic along Abbey Lane. The proposed storage building will act as a noise barrier against this. The noise from traffic accessing the site is likely to be far less than the present level of noise from traffic along Abbey Lane. This will be reduced by the 2.1m fence that is proposed along the boundary with the properties along




41

Swithland Avenue. The nature of the use is unlikely to result in significant vehicle movements or noise being generated on site. I do not believe it is necessary to restrict the hours of use. The proposed building is 12m high but sits 1.5m lower than that of the houses on Swithland Avenue. The building would be 13m from the rear boundary of the houses and about 30m from the rear walls of the houses themselves. There are no windows in the elevation facing Swithland Avenue. I believe the proposed warehouse would not have a significant detrimental impact on light, privacy and outlook for the properties along Swithland Avenue. Character and appearance The proposed building is 12m high but sits 1.5m lower than that of the houses on Swithland Avenue and approximately 0.5m lower than Abbey Lane. Given the height of buildings in the area such as Green’s Gym and I do not believe this would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area. The design, while plain, is acceptable. Highways and parking matters The Highway Authority have asked for minor alterations including a slight change to the layout of the bus stop, curbs, street lighting and pedestrian crossings. This can be secured by condition. Conclusion The proposed use is acceptable in this location, is of a reasonable design, will not have a significant detrimental impact of the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of Swithland Avenue or upon highway safety, congestion and parking. I therefore recommend APPROVAL. CONDITIONS 1. START WITHIN THREE YEARS 2. Notwithstanding the Use Classes Order 2005 the site and building shall only be

used for self-storage and not for general storage and distribution use within the B8 Use Class. (In the interests of highway safety, management and congestion, the residential amenities enjoyed by the residents of Swithland Avenue and in accordance with policies AM10, AM15, AM17, PS10 and BE21 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

3. Development shall not commence until satisfactory changes to the bus stop,

curbs, street lighting, access road and pedestrian crossings have been secured. The changes agreed shall be implemented prior to the use of the facility unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. (To provide a means of setting down and picking up guests, staff and goods in accordance with policies AM01, AM03, AM10, AM11, AM15, AM17, AM22 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)




42

4. The development shall not be occupied until the car parking and manoeuvering

area has been laid out in accordance with the approved plans. (To provide adequate parking and turning space in accordance with policies AM1, AM11, AM15 & AM17 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

5. Development shall not commence until details of secure and sheltered facilities

for cycles and powered two wheelers are submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The use shall not commence until development has been carried out in accordance with the agreed details. (To provide for sustainable means of transport in accordance with policies AM02 and AM11 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

6. Before the development is begun samples of the materials to be used on all

external elevations and roofs shall be submitted agreed in writing between the applicant and the City Council as local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details. (In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with policy UD01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

7. This consent shall relate solely to the submitted plans (ref.no.25007-PL-SS-

01RevA,02RevB,03RevB,04RevB,05RevB,06RevB,07RevB,) received by the City Council as local planning authority on the 3rd December 2007 (For the avoidance of doubt).


complies with the relevant criteria in the City of Leicester Local Plan policies listed in this decision, and with Supplementary Planning Guidance - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and Parking Standards, Supplementary Planning Documents - Abbey Meadows and Residential Amenity (Draft), and there are no material considerations which outweigh these policies. The City Council considers that any harm can be overcome by the attached conditions.

2. Please note that sections of the development works abut the highway. These

works are likely to damage the highway during the construction process. All works on the highway is on land outside your control and it is required that you contact Mike Pears (Highways Maintenance), telephone 0116 223 2012, to arrange all relevant permissions and site inspections prior to the commencement of works. All works on the highway shall be to satisfaction of the highway authority.

3. With regards Condition 3 a Section 38 and Section 278 Agreement will be

required. A detailed design shall be submitted to the Highway Authority for approval for all proposed works on the highway. Notwithstanding the submitted planning drawing all works on the highway shall comply with the design standards of the Leicester City Council’s construction specification and adopted guidance - Highways, Transportation and Development. Such details must include turning facilities, access widths, gradients, surfacing, visibility splays, pelican crossing location and specification, white lining proposals including any




43

traffic regulation orders affected, Safety Audit etc. and be submitted for approval by the local highway authority before development commences. Please contact Mr David Sankar (tel.0116 2526600) at the earliest opportunity to discuss these requirements further.

Policies relating to this recommendation 2006_PS02 Within the Strategic Regeneration Area (SRA) planning permission

will only be granted where a comprehensive and coordinated approach to development can be demonstrated.

2006_PS08 Planning permission will be given for development that contributes

towards the creation of a science and technology based business park in the vicinity of the Space Centre.

2006_PS10 Criteria will be used to assess planning applications which concern

the amenity of existing or proposed residents. 2006_UD01 Planning permission granted for sustainable high quality building



2006_UD03 Planning permission will be granted for development which includes

high quality and imaginative designs for streets and public spaces which meet criteria.

2006_UD04 Planning permission will not be given for development proposals

which would fail sufficiently to achieve efficiency in the use of energy.

2006_UD07 New development and redevelopment should have sufficient refuse

storage space to allow segregated waste collection. 2006_AM01 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of


2006_AM02 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of cyclists have been incorporated into the design and new or improved cycling routes should link directly and safely to key destinations.

2006_AM10 Vehicle speed restraints should be integral to the design of new or

existing development. 2006_AM11 Proposals for parking provision for non-residential development

should not exceed the maximum standards specified in Appendix 01. 2006_AM15 Location and design of new parking provision should be subject to

safety and design criteria.




44

2006_AM17 Non-residential development will, where practical, be expected to


2006_E07 Planning permission not granted for storage and distribution

industries over the permitted development threshold within the Restriction Zone as defined on the Proposals Map.

2006_BE16 Planning permission will be granted for the development of

renewable energy installations where local impacts are not outweighed by wider benefits. Major developments must realise their potential for incorporating renewable energy technologies.

2006_BE17 Planning permission will be granted for infrastructure associated with combined heat and power schemes where local impacts are not outweighed by wider benefits. Major developments and those within the SRA must source their energy from CHP where feasible.

2006_BE23 Development on land that is or may be contaminated will only be allowed where the risks caused by the contamination can be reasonably overcome.

2006_BE21 Noise-generating development not permitted if affecting unacceptably amenity of noise-sensitive land uses; noise-sensitive development not permitted if affected by noise from noise-generating land uses.

2006_IMP01 In new development proposals planning obligations will be sought to secure from developers the necessary costs and provision of related infrastructure and needs.


20072260 CORNER OF ABBEY LANE AND ABBEY PARK ROAD (FORMER LINREAD SITE)

Proposal:

MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF OFFICES (CLASS B1) AND FLATS (CLASS C3) (14 UNITS - 6X1BED, 7X2BED AND 1X3BED); ACCESS (AMENDED PLANS)

Applicant: WESTERN RANGE LTD & IMD LTD




WJJ WARD: Abbey




45

Introduction The site is a former industrial site that has been cleared. It lies on the junction of Abbey Lane and Abbey Park Road. To the east of the site are the 1920’s/30’s semi-detached houses along Swithland Avenue. To the north and to the west (on the other side of Abbey Lane) are employment uses. To the south, on the other side of Abbey Park Road is Abbey Park. The site is within the Abbey Meadows policy area. Background 20041167 – Redevelopment of site for repair of motor vehicles and car sales – Approved (reserved matters for 19980021). This permission has now expired. 20010804 – Buildings for general industrial (Class B2) and warehousing (Class B8) – Approved. This permission has now expired. 19980021 – Redevelopment of site for repair of motor vehicles and car sales (Outline application) – Approved. This permission has now expired. The Proposal The proposal is for a four-storey building with offices on the ground and first floor and residential flats on the second and third floors. Car parking would be provided in the basement. Some of the offices and flats would have rooftop/terraced gardens and there would be a communal garden at the rear. The main pedestrian entrance to the building faces the corner and the building would step down towards adjacent houses




46

on Abbey Park Road and Swithland Avenue. Vehicle access would be from Abbey Park Road. Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan (CLLP) policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report. The site lies within the Abbey Meadows Intervention Area (Science and Technology Business Park). Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (Adopted April 2007). Leicester City Council (LCC) – Standards for Self-Contained Flats (the Standards). LCC – Open Space Study (2007) Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) – Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. SPG – Parking Standards. Planning Policy Guidance Note Number 4 (PPG4) – Planning and Noise. Opposite the site is Abbot Penny’s Wall that encloses Abbey Park. This is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM). Consultations Parks – A contribution is required for the enhancement of Abbey Park (Children's Play Space - £3184, Youth/Outdoor Playing Space - £3264, Total – £6448.) Education – A contribution of £9542.24 is required towards local education provision.

Highways – No objections subject to conditions.

Leicester Regeneration Company (LRC) – Consider that a mixed use is acceptable. Pollution (Land) – No objections. Pollution (Noise & Air) – No objections in principle, however, due to noise from vehicle movement and employees working, recommend that office hours of use be limited. English Heritage – Object. The existing wall around Abbey Park creates a sense of enclosure for those within Abbey Park. At four storeys high the proposed building would be visible above the wall by those inside the park. This would reduce the sense of enclosure and may set a precedent for the park to be dominated by tall buildings around it. Conservation Advisory Panel (CAP). Comments:

• better design than other corner buildings nearby

• curvy roof slope feature appears dated now

• wall at ground level should be changed to walls and railings




47

Representations Letters received seem to refer to both this application and the application for the self-storage building on the neighbouring site (20062259). 18 objections have been received on the grounds of:

• loss of privacy

• loss of light

• noise from the new units

• noise from additional traffic going in and out of site

• insufficient parking

• the road junction is already dangerous – new accesses to the site and increased traffic may make it more so

• foundations of houses may be damaged by work

• value of houses may drop

• the new location of the bus stop may be inconvenient to bus users

• the properties along Swithland Avenue may be more vulnerable to crime

• the warehouse may be a fire hazard to neighbouring houses

• fumes from vehicles visiting the site, gas boilers, etc, may reduce air quality, there is no need for more offices and flats in this area

• there is no need for more flats in the area

1 letter of support on the following grounds:

• the development is an exciting design that will help regenerate this part of Leicester

• given that the properties along Swithland Avenue overlook each other the overlooking from the proposed development is not significant.

Consideration Principle of development I believe offices and flats in this location will complement the aims for the nearby Science Park. Policy E05 which relates to major office development (that over 1000sqm) states that it should be first located in either the Office Core or Abbey Meadows before other sites in the city are considered. The office is just under 1000sqm in floorspace. I therefore believe the proposal is acceptable in principle. Amenity The rear and sides of the building will have windows, balconies and small rooftop gardens from which residents will be able to look towards the existing properties along Abbey Park Road and Swithland Avenue.




48

The site lies within Zone 2 as defined by the Residential Amenity SPD (Draft). This states that the building height to open space (street/garden) ratio should be 1:1.5. The main part of the proposed building is 14m high. Wall to wall the building would be 46m from the rear walls of the houses on Swithland Avenue. This would result in a ratio of 1:3.3. I believe this will maintain a reasonable level of amenity for the properties along Swithland Avenue. There is a gap of 6.5m between the proposed building and the side of number 115 Abbey Park Road. At this point the proposed building has dropped to 3m high (balcony/terrace garden). At just over 7.5m from 115 Abbey Park Road it rises to 8m, at 9m distance to 11m and finally at 11m to 14m high. The rear wall of the new building would be on the same building line as the rear walls of the houses on Abbey Park Road. Given this and that they will face the side of 115 Abbey Park Road I believe this is acceptable. Overall I believe the proposed office and flats would not have a significant detrimental impact on the privacy, light and outlook enjoyed by the properties along Swithland Avenue and Abbey Park Lane. The properties along Swithland Avenue are presently subject to a significant amount of noise generated by traffic along Abbey Lane. The proposed building will act as a noise barrier against this. The noise from traffic accessing the site is likely to be far less than the present level of noise from traffic along Abbey Lane. This will be reduced by 2.1m fence that is proposed along the boundary with the properties along Swithland Avenue. Although the proposed office is likely to be relatively quiet I am concerned about the impact it may have on the residents of the flats above. Activity during the day is likely to be unexceptional however even moderate activity at night could cause significant disturbance. PPG4 states that background noise drops significantly between the hours of 2300 and 0730. I therefore recommend a condition be attached to restrict operations during that period. The B1 use class includes research & development and light industrial uses. As there are flats on the third and fourth floors I believe such uses may disturb residents. I therefore recommend a condition be attached to limit the use to that of offices. The Residential Amenity SPD (Draft) states that flat developments should have amenity space (balcony/garden) of 5sqm per flat. The development has in excess of this for each flat. The communal garden is located to the rear of the building which will shield it from noise from the main roads. I believe the development provides an adequate amount and quality of amenity space for future residents. The development is likely to increase the use of public open space in the area. I believe a contribution to the enhancement of existing provision in the area is reasonable. I recommend a condition be attached in this respect. Character and appearance The SPD for Abbey Meadows suggests that housing density in the Riverside West Area should be around 30-49 dwellings per hectare (dph) and that the height should




49

be 2-3 storeys. This level of density is roughly that of 1920’s/30’s semi-detached houses (typically 40dph) like those on Swithland Avenue. In terms of site coverage the proposed development is of a higher equivalent density than this. I believe it is acceptable given other similar employment type developments on sites in the area. The main part of the proposed building is 14m. Modern buildings are typically 3m per storey in height. This gives a height of about 4-5 storeys. The building will be four storeys high as the ground floor will be set about a metre above ground level on a plinth. Given the height of buildings in the area such as Green’s Gym I do not believe this would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area. The design seeks to address the corner by having an entrance and glass oval frontage that faces it. The building steps down as one moves away from the corner which emphasizes the focus on the corner and gives the building an interesting silhouette. I recommend conditions are attached to ensure acceptable design detailing and materials are used on the building. The original drawings submitted included a wall on top of the plinth next to the footpath on Abbey Park Road and Abbey Lane. The applicants have agreed to replace this with railings to give an active frontage. Abbey Park Road, which is four lanes wide plus footpaths at this point, provides a strong separation between the site and Abbot Penny’s Wall and Abbey Park. There are a number of buildings that are visible from within the park boundaries such as the Space Centre and the tall buildings in the city centre. I am satisfied that the proposal will not have a detrimental visual impact on Abbot Penny’s Wall and Abbey Park. Overall I believe the proposed development will improve the character and appearance of the area. Highways and parking matters The Highway Authority have confirmed that they believe the development will not cause highway congestion, safety or parking problems. Thirty-four car parking spaces will be provided. This is below the maximum parking standard for a development of this size. They require alterations to the highway. The central reservation on Abbey Park Road will need to be blocked to stop vehicles turning right into the site when approaching from the Wolsey Island direction. Other more minor alterations include a slight change to the layout of the bus stop, curbs, street lighting, pedestrian crossings. All these changes can be covered by S38 and S278 Agreements. I recommend conditions are attached to reserve the parking and manoeuvring area and to ensure parking for cycles and powered two wheelers are provided. To encourage the use of sustainable means of transport I recommend a condition is attached to ensure new residents are issued with travel packs. Other matters The Council archaeologist has confirmed he has no concerns due to the extensive disturbance of the ground in the last hundred or so years. The Access Officer has raised concerns about the ramp for those of limited mobility. I am presently awaiting more details from the applicant and will address the matter in a




50

supplementary report. Two parking spaces for those of limited mobility are to be provided. This is acceptable. Conclusion The proposed use is acceptable and the development will provide an interesting building that will improve the character and appearance of the area while maintaining the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring properties and levels of highway safety, congestion and parking. I therefore recommend APPROVAL. CONDITIONS 1. START WITHIN THREE YEARS 2. Notwithstanding the Use Classes Order 2005 the ground and first floors shall

only be used as office and not for any other use whatsoever. (In the interests of the residential amenities enjoyed by the residents of the flats above and in accordance with policies PS10 and BE21 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

3. The offices shall not be used outside the hours of 0730-2300. (To protect the

amenities of residents of the flats in accordance with policies PS10 and BE21.) 4. The development shall not commence until details have been submitted to and

agreed with the local planning authority for the provision or enhancement of local education provision, unless agreed otherwise in writing. No flat shall be occupied until such provision or enhancement has been secured. (To assist in the availability of education provision for the occupants of the development and in accordance with policy IMP01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

5. The development shall not commence until details have been submitted to and

agreed with the local planning authority for the enhancement of off-site open space at Abbey Park, unless agreed otherwise in writing. No flat shall be occupied until such provision or enhancement has been secured. (To assist in the availability of open space provision for the occupants of the development and in accordance with policies GE12 and GE13 of the City of Leicester Local Plan and the Leicester City Council Open Space Study (2007).)

6. Prior to the occupation of any of the flats the communal internal and external

gardens shall be laid out in accordance with the approved plans and shall be retained for these purposes at all times. (To provide residents with a reasonable level of amenity in accordance with policies PS10 and H07 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

7. Development shall not commence until satisfactory changes to the bus stop,

curbs, street lighting, access road and pedestrian crossings have been secured. The changes agreed shall be implemented prior to the use of the facility unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. (To provide a means of setting down and picking up guests, staff and goods in accordance with policies AM01, AM03, AM10, AM11, AM15, AM17, AM22 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)




51

8. No flat or any part of the offices shall be occupied until the car parking and

manoeuvring area has been laid out in accordance with the approved plans. (To provide adequate parking and turning space in accordance with policies AM1, AM11, AM15 & AM17 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

9. Development shall not commence until details of secure and sheltered facilities

for cycles and powered two wheelers are submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. No flat or any part of the offices shall be occupied until development has been carried out in accordance with the agreed details. (To provide for sustainable means of transport in accordance with policies AM02 and AM11 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

10. No flat shall be occupied until the content of travel packs for new residents has

been agreed in writing with the local planning authority (they should include maps, timetables and vouchers). The travel pack shall be supplied to all new residents upon occupying a dwelling. (To ensure there are adequate travel arrangements for occupiers and to promote sustainable means of transport in accordance with policy AM09 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

11. Before the development is begun samples of the materials to be used on all

external elevations and roofs shall be submitted agreed in writing between the applicant and the City Council as local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details. (In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with policy UD01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

12. Prior to the commencement of development detailed plans for bays, curtain

walling, windows and doors, eaves, terraces and railings shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details. (To maintain the character and appearance of the area in accordance with policy UD01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

13. This consent shall relate solely to the submitted plans (ref.no.25007-PL-MU-

01RevA,02RevA,03RevA,04RevA,05RevB,06RevA,07RevA,08RevA,09RevA,10RevA) received by the City Council as local planning authority on the 3rd December 2007 (For the avoidance of doubt).


complies with the relevant criteria in the City of Leicester Local Plan policies listed in this decision, and with Supplementary Planning Guidance - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Supplementary Planning Documents - Abbey Meadows and Residential Amenity (Draft), and there are no material considerations which outweigh these policies. The City Council considers that any harm can be overcome by the attached conditions.

2. Condition 4 can be satisfied by a payment of £9542.24 to the Council’s Director

of Children & Young People's Services to secure the works described in the




52

condition. This sum to be index-linked from the date of this permission by reference to the RICS Building Cost Information Service Tender Price index or by reference to any other appropriate formula agreed with the City Council in advance.

3. Condition 5 can be satisfied by a payment of £6448 to the Council’s Director of

Regeneration and Culture (Parks & Green Spaces Account) to secure the works described in the condition. This sum to be index-linked from the date of this permission by reference to the RICS Building Cost Information Service Tender Price index or by reference to any other appropriate formula agreed with the City Council in advance.

4. A Section 38 and Section 278 Agreement will be required. A detailed design shall

be submitted to the Highway Authority for approval for all proposed works on the highway. Notwithstanding the submitted planning drawing all works on the highway shall comply with the design standards of the Leicester City Council’s construction specification and adopted guidance - Highways, Transportation and Development. Such details must include turning facilities, access widths, gradients, surfacing, visibility splays, pelican crossing location and specification, white lining proposals including any traffic regulation orders affected, Safety Audit etc. and be submitted for approval by the local highway authority before development commences. Please contact Mr David Sankar (tel.0116 2526600) at the earliest opportunity to discuss these requirements further.

5. Please note that sections of the development works abut the highway. These

works are likely to damage the highway during the construction process. All works on the highway is on land outside your control and it is required that you contact Mike Pears (Highways Maintenance), telephone 0116 223 2012, to arrange all relevant permissions and site inspections prior to the commencement of works. All works on the highway shall be to satisfaction of the highway authority.

Policies relating to this recommendation 2006_PS08 Planning permission will be given for development that contributes

towards the creation of a science and technology based business park in the vicinity of the Space Centre.


amenity of existing or proposed residents. 2006_UD01 Planning permission granted for sustainable high quality building






53

2006_UD03 Planning permission will be granted for development which includes high quality and imaginative designs for streets and public spaces which meet criteria.

2006_UD04 Planning permission will not be given for development proposals which

would fail sufficiently to achieve efficiency in the use of energy. 2006_UD07 New development and redevelopment should have sufficient refuse

storage space to allow segregated waste collection. 2006_AM01 Planning permission will only be granted where the needs of




2006_AM10 Vehicle speed restraints should be integral to the design of new or

existing development. 2006_AM11 Proposals for parking provision for non-residential development should

not exceed the maximum standards specified in Appendix 01. 2006_AM12 Levels of car parking for residential development will be determined in

accordance with the standards in Appendix 01. 2006_AM13 When a number of users occupy a single site, development proposals

should take account of the opportunities for communal and shared parking provision.

2006_AM15 Location and design of new parking provision should be subject to

safety and design criteria. 2006_AM17 Non-residential development will, where practical, be expected to


2006_H07 Criteria for the development of new flats and the conversion of existing

buildings to self-contained flats. 2006_E05 Sets out the preferred sustainable locations for major office

development of over 1,000 square metres floor space beginning with the Central Office Core and the Abbey Lane Research Business Park.

2006_BE16 Planning permission will be granted for the development of renewable

energy installations where local impacts are not outweighed by wider benefits. Major developments must realise their potential for incorporating renewable energy technologies.




54

2006_BE17 Planning permission will be granted for infrastructure associated with combined heat and power schemes where local impacts are not outweighed by wider benefits. Major developments and those within the SRA must source their energy from CHP where feasible.

2006_BE23 Development on land that is or may be contaminated will only be

allowed where the risks caused by the contamination can be reasonably overcome.

2006_GE12 Criteria for the provision of children's play areas to serve residential

development. 2006_GE13 Residential development must make provision for youth and adult

play. 2006_IMP01 In new development proposals planning obligations will be sought to

secure from developers the necessary costs and provision of related infrastructure and needs.


20072332 13 TOLLER ROAD

Proposal: TWO STOREY EXTENSION AT SIDE OF CARE HOME (CLASS C2)

Applicant: CASTLEBECK CARE LTD


Status: Minor development


AS WARD: Knighton

Introduction This application relates to a semi detached property located within a primarily residential area. It is also located within the Stoneygate Conservation Area. The property is currently vacant. Background Planning permission (87/0799) for change of dwelling house to residential home for the elderly was approved in 1987. A condition was attached stating ‘That part of the premises to which this permission relates shall be used only as a residential care home for the elderly and not for any other purpose (including any other purpose within Class C2 (residential institutions) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. Planning permission (20071777) for the ‘variation of condition 2 to planning permission 87/0799/5 to allow use of the property as a care home (Class C2)’ was approved in November 2007. .




55

The Proposal It is proposed to extend the property to the side at two storey level. The extension would have a gable frontage and would be part rendered, part brick. It would go no deeper than the existing rear elevation. The entire property is to be re-arranged internally reducing the number of bedrooms from 11 down to 8. An existing flat roof garage to the side would be demolished and it was considered that conservation area consent was not required in this instance Policy Considerations City of Leicester Local Plan policies relevant to this application are listed at the end of this report. There is also additional guidance for house extensions contained in ‘A design guide for House Extensions’. Consultations Highways Authority: Due to the reduction of the number of bed rooms, and that the increase in floor area would be 34m², the authority has no objections. The Conservation Advisory Panel comment that the pair of semi detached houses are in symmetry with each other and that the proposed extension would spoil it. They suggest that the garage be removed and to extend to the rear.

TOLLER ROAD

10

12

16

9

5

1

13

15

17

12

1a

2

19

16

20

24

11





56

Representations One letter of representation has been received from a local resident stating that this is an excellent proposal, which would bring a sadly neglected property back into use. He goes on to say that the developers intention to materials to match the existing through out is to be welcomed. He does have a concern with regards to the existing windows in that they require attention and that it would not be appropriate to replace them with upvc windows. Consideration The adjacent property, 15 Toller Road has a garage to the side and two small, non-principal room windows in the side gable. The extension does not extend beyond the front or rear elevation of the existing house and is on the same footprint as the garage to be demolished. A 45° line would not be broken by the side extension if taken from the edge/centre of the neighbouring properties closest windows. I consider that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon the amenities that the occupiers of that property currently enjoy. The applicant has tried to mirror that existing gable in terms of the design of the extension and the proposed materials to be used. The symmetry of the pair of semi detached houses would be broken by the additional gable but I consider that the applicant has designed the extension to be in keeping with the existing house and that it would not detract from the appearance of the pair of semi detached houses. I also consider that the proposal has been designed to be in keeping with the Stoneygate Conservation Area and that it would bring a neglected property back into use. I therefore consider that the proposal is not contrary to policies contained in the local plan and is in keeping with the conservation area. I recommend APPROVAL subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. START WITHIN THREE YEARS 2. The new walls and roof shall be constructed in materials to match those existing.

(In the interests of visual amenity, and in accordance with policy BE06 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.)

3. This consent shall relates solely to the submitted plans (Ref:2007/137 02, 03,

04,05) received by the City Council on 14th December 2007. (For the avoidance of doubt).


complies with the relevant criteria in the City of Leicester Local Plan policies listed in this decision, and there are no material considerations which outweigh




57

these policies. The City Council considers that any harm to visual and residential amenity can be overcome by the attached conditions.

Policies relating to this recommendation 2006_AM12 Levels of car parking for residential development will be determined in

accordance with the standards in Appendix 01. 2006_BE06 New development or changes of use within or adjoining a

Conservation Area must preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area.

2006_UD01 Planning permission granted for sustainable high quality building

designs providing proposals take into consideration criteria.

PLANNING INSPECTORATE APPEAL DECISIONS

20078033A 10 CALVER HEY ROAD Proposal: FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION AT SIDE OF HOUSE (CLASS C3) Appellant: MR PETER TAYLOR Appeal type: Planning Appeal (Sections 78/79) Appeal received: 30 July 2007 Appeal decision: Allowed Appeal dec date: 18 December 2007

RMF AREA: W WARD: Beaumont Leys

HOPWOOD CLOSE

CORBET CL

OSE

BALLA

RDS C

LOSE

MILTON CRES

LEYSDALE CLOSE

CALVER HEY

ROA

D

FERNLEYS CLOSE

1

11

23

48

35

25

16

9

1

113

117

115 103to

11

1

2

2

10

to

147149151135

145

131133

Milton House

41

1

4

5

171 to 187

655359

162





58

Location and Site Description

The appeal site is located at the junction of Calver Hey Road and Ballards Close.

No 10 Calver Hey Road falls at the end of a row of 6 terraced properties. The properties are built at an angle to the road and are stepped to maintain a standard distance from the footway. Calver Hey Road rises significantly at this point, which leads to a level change between each of the terraced properties of approximately 1 metre.

The effect of the angles that the properties are built at and the change in ground level leads to an individual appearance to this row of properties with a staggered building line and a strong pattern to the ridgelines of the buildings.

The appeal site benefits from a single storey side extension, which is set back from the property and has a hipped roof.

The Proposal

The proposed development was to enlarge the extension to two storeys, with the first floor being set back by 0.75m and a similar drop in the ridge of the roof. The application was refused upon two grounds:

1.The proposed first floor extension, by reason of its appearance and design would be an unattractive addition to the existing group of houses, resulting in an adverse impact upon the character of the area and the street scene. Terefore it is considered to be contrary to Policies H15 and UD01 of the City of Leicester Local Plan and the Supplementary Planning Guidance `A Design Guide for House Extensions` (Adopted) 2. The proposed first floor extension, by reason of its size and siting, would be an incongrous feature in the street scene resulting in an adverse impact on the character of the area and the street. Therefore it is considered contrary to Policies PS10, UD01 and H15 and the Supplementary Planning Guidance `A Design Guide for House Extensions` (Adopted).

The Appeal

An appeal was made against the decision to refuse planning permission, which was allowed.

The Inspector considered that the set back of the extension and the drop in ridgeline would lead to the extension being sufficiently subservient for its impact upon the building line to be minimised and further considered that the proposal would reflect the disrupted character of the building line of Calver Hey Road.

The Inspector considered that the proximity of a large landscaped parking area to the junction of Ballards Close and Calver Hey Road would be sufficient to ensure that the junction did not have an enclosed appearance and argued that the existing extension was already forward of the building line of Ballards Close.

Commentary




59

The Inspector concluded that the proposal was not contrary to Policies PS10, H15 and UD01 of the Local Plan, but discounted the SPG “A Design Guide for House Extensions” as the new format of appeal questionnaire requested information as to the public consultation that supplementary documents were subject to at the time of their adoption. Whilst the Inspector was informed that the document was adopted, it is noted that consultation details need to be supplied with appeals for weight to be attached to SPGs and SPDs.

PLANNING INSPECTORATE APPEAL DECISIONS

20078041A 32 WESTLEIGH ROAD Proposal: SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION AT REAR OF HOUSE;

BICYCLE STORAGE ENCLOSURE; ALTERATIONS TO BOUNDARY WALL; PROVISION OF GATE

Appellant: DR DAVID SHEPHERD Appeal type: Planning Appeal (Sections 78/79) Appeal received: 30 August 2007 Appeal decision: Allowed Appeal dec date: 7 January 2008

RMF AREA: W WARD: Westcotes

Location and Site Description

This appeal site is a mid-terrace property located within the Ashleigh Road Conservation Area, which is covered by an Article 4 Direction removing permitted development rights from residential properties. To the rear of the site runs the Ivanhoe railway line.

WESTLEIGH ROAD

FOSSE ROAD SOUTH

6

14

22

1

11

15

17

16

18

20

Westleigh

Christadelphian Hall

4035

25232

57

45

32

34

234

61

247

245





60

The terraced properties in this area are generally three stories, set back from the road by a front yard and benefit from rear gardens of approximately 15m in depth. The properties originally boasted two storey rear outriggers, which have generally been retained. In this instance, the appeal site also benefitted from a single storey rear extension built under permitted development.

The Proposal

An application was made for a single storey rear extension, a bicycle storage enclosure, alterations to the boundary wall and provision of a new side gate.

The extension was to form a garden room, and take the place of the existing single storey extension, but with a larger footprint. The proposed extension was to be 10.6m wide, leaving 40cm to the boundary with no 30, and be 11.9m deep. The extension would have left an undeveloped courtyard immediately to the rear of the original rear elevation. The new walls facing into this courtyard would include a sliding glass door and extensive glass panelling, facing forwards and sidewards respectively.

No objection, was raised by the Council to the boundary wall alterations nor the bicycle store.

The proposal was refused on two grounds:

1. “The rear extension, including the screening by nature of its siting, design and height would lead to the loss of privacy, outlook and overshadowing, and as such, would compromise the residential amenity of the occupiers of no 30 Westleigh Road. Therefore, the development would be contrary to Policy H15 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.”

2. “The proposed rear extension, by nature of its siting and design, would lead to the loss of outlook from the principal room of the existing dwelling and as such would compromise the residential amenity of the existing and future occupiers of the said property. Therefore, the development would be contrary to Policy H15 and PS10 of the City of Leicester Local Plan.”

The Appeal

An appeal was lodged on 29th August 2007. Two principal reasons for the appeal were sited, in that the development would not compromise the neighbours residential amenity nor that of occupiers of the appeal site.

The Appeal Decision

The appeal was allowed and permission was granted subject to conditions.

The Inspector considered that the only windows facing directly towards the neighbouring property would be roof lights, and the angle of the folding door and glass screen would not allow for good views to the neighbouring property and as such would not significantly affect the neighbours amenity. The Inspector further rejected the City Council’s opinion that the bulk of the extension would be detrimental to the outlook currently afforded from the neighbour’s windows.




61

With regards to the second reason for refusal, the Inspector did not consider the effect upon the residents of the appeal site’s amenity to be a strong concern. The proposal would still allow outlook from the affected window over the resulting courtyard and the low roof profile was deemed to minimise any losses. Furthermore, the Inspector considered that outlook was already compromised by an arch hung with abundant evergreen foliage

Commentary

The Inspector confirmed that amenity of existing occupiers was a material consideration which the planning system ought to protect in the public interest, but concluded that on this occasion the benefits of the extension outweighed the loss of outlook from the original window of the rear elevation.

