Home Contact Sitemap

Hyde Park and Woodhouse Online

what's happening in our area



rss feed
  • Recent Comments

    • Derek Rimmer: A report in the YEP The artists impression in the report shows, that as suspected, it will be a double...
    • Ray W: First have increased 1 and 6 to every 7 minutes, 15 on Sundays. Other increases are planned. There is now a £1...
    • Ray W: 95 is being replaced by 1 and 6 each going to a 7 minute freqency, 15 on Sundays
    • Bill: Thanks Derek for this information.
    • Bill: Thanks for your comment Peter. The talk last week was given by Dave Haskins from Metro. In October last year,...
  • Categories



Welcome to Hyde Park and Woodhouse Online, a place where we the local residents can express our views about what's happening in our area.

Home » Application 16/01322/FU ( 46 Burley Street )

Application 16/01322/FU ( 46 Burley Street )

Planning application 14/03735/FU was submitted on the 24th June 2014 by Burley Place Limited. It was for an 8 storey student block at 46 Burley Street that would have provided 128 studio flats. The proposed building would have replaced the original building on the site which had one storey facing onto Park Lane. This building was demolished by the developer in 2013 without planning permission. In October 2014 the planning application was revised bringing the number of flats down to 113 and increasing the height of the building to 9 storeys. The application was considered by the city centre plans panel on the 12th February 2015 and rejected on the grounds that (a) the living accommodation would be cramped and (b) the building would tower over neighbouring buildings and would represent an over-intensive use of the site. Officers were delegated to formally draft the reasons for refusal.1 A Decision Notice was issued on the 16th February.2 On the 27th February 2015, the applicant appealed against the decision3 (Appeal reference APP/N4720/W/15/3005747).

.

The appeal was heard on the 22nd July 2015. It was rejected on the 10th September 2015 because, “The design of the blade would adversely affect the character and appearance of the locality, and the development would fail to provide a satisfactory standard of comfortable living conditions for future occupiers.” 4 The “blade” was the tallest element of the proposed building. The remainder of the building was 4 storeys tall facing onto Park Lane. Now a further revised application has been submitted (application 16/01322/FU). This latest application is proposing a building that would be without the blade but which would be 5 storeys tall facing onto Park Lane. So whilst the blade itself has been removed, the height of the rest of the building has been increased to compensate. The inspector who rejected the appeal did not say that an overall taller and bulkier building would be acceptable.

Before the plans panel refused the previous planning application, councillors were warned that if they refused the application, it would be impossible for the site to be developed, and yet here we are over a year later with yet another revised planning application albeit for a development with fewer (but larger) flats than was previously proposed.

The two following images illustrate how the proposed development differs from the previous proposal and how it would dominate neighbouring buildings and the surrounding area.

.

Step i 470
ooooooo
Step d 470

.

ooooooo
READ MORE
ooooooo

References


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Home