Agenda and minutes

  The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked Members and Officers to introduce themselves

  The Chair announced that this would be the last full panel meeting which Mr Thorp would attend as he was retiring from the Council on 1^st September after being with the Council for 40 years.  Members were informed that John would still attend meetings occasionally as he would retain his involvement with a small number of major schemes

  The Chair paid tribute to John’s work and his invaluable contribution to many important schemes within the city

  Other Members echoed these sentiments and referred to John’s ability to explain complex issues in a way which could be easily understood and his ability to persuade Members on the qualities of developments when these were not always instantly apparent

  John’s contributions to Plans Panel City Centre meetings were commented on as was the level of debate which arose at these meetings, largely through the explanations and architectural challenges John highlighted and explained

  Tribute was paid to John’s approach, in that he had respect for the existing built environment.  The diversity of the work he had undertaken was referred to, this being from railway arches to the Art Gallery, the Leonardo Building and the remodelling of City Square and also the fact that John was only the seventh person to hold the prestigious position of Civic Architect in Leeds since 1870

  It was stated that John had done more than anyone else to shape the city and that Leeds was better for it

  In responding John Thorp paid tribute to the work of Plans Panel City Centre and thanked Members for the richness of the debate which had been generated at the meetings

To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

  Although there were no formal late items, Members were informed  that the Chief Planning Officer would provide some important information later in the meeting (minute 26 refers)

To declare any personal/prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct

  The following Members declared personal/prejudicial interests for the purposes of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct

  Application 06/04610/OT – Mixed use development at Kirkstall Road and Wellington Road (minute 22 refers):

  Councillors Coulson and Matthews declared personal interests through being members of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals

  Councillor Campbell declared a personal interest through having been a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority at the time Metro would have commented on the proposals

  Councillor Fox declared a personal interest as a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority Passenger Consultative Committee as Metro had commented on the proposals

  Councillor Monaghan declared a personal interest as a member of Leeds Civic Trust which had commented on the proposals

  Applications 08/05307/FU – 14 – 28 The Calls LS2 (minute 23 refers):

  Councillor Coulson and Matthews declared personal interest through being members of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals

  Councillor Campbell declared a personal interest through having been a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority at the time Metro had commented on the proposals

  Councillor Fox declared a personal interest through being a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority Passenger Consultative Committee as Metro had commented on the proposals

  Councillor Monaghan declared a personal interest as a member of Leeds Civic Trust which had commented on the proposals

  Councillor Taggart declared a personal interest through being the Chair of West Yorkshire Joint Services Authority who managed WYAAS which had commented on the application

  Application 10/01601/FU – Victoria Gardens LS1 (minute 24 refers):

  Councillor Monaghan declared a personal interest as a member of Leeds Civic Trust which had objected to the proposals

  Councillor Fox declared a personal interest as a close family member was a minor shareholder of Marks and Spencer as this organisation had donated the funding for the scheme

  Application 09/03230/FU – St Peter’s Hall and House and Chantrell House, Leeds Parish Church Kirkgate LS7 (minute 25 refers)

  Councillors Campbell, Nash and Selby declared personal interests through being members of English Heritage which had commented on the proposals

  Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Driver, G Harper, G Latty, M Hamilton and A Carter

  The Chair welcomed Councillors Taggart, Coulson, Fox and Matthews who were substituting at the meeting

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 22^nd July 2010

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 22^nd July 2010 be approved

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application to layout access roads and erect mixed use development, with residential, business,  retail, leisure and community uses, with car parking, public open spaces, riverside walkway and nature corridor. The Panel previously considered a report on this application on 5^th November 2009 (minute 41 refers)

(Report attached)

  Further to minute 41 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 5^th November 2009, where Panel considered a position statement on proposals for a mixed-use scheme on land at Kirkstall Road and Wellington Road, Members considered the formal outline application

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting.  A site visit had taken place earlier in the day which Members had attended

  Officers presented the report and informed the Panel that the proposals were for a substantial new quarter in the city on a 5.3 hectare cleared brownfield site close to the city centre.  The outline application sought approval for siting and access only but a design code had been submitted which set out the proposed general scale of the buildings.  Detailed design issues would be considered in due course in the Reserved Matters application

  Revisions had been made to the scheme in line with the comments made at the November 2009 Panel

The development which would be carried out in a phased manner, comprised two sites which would be connected by a pedestrian and cycle bridge over the river. On the Kirkstall Road frontage there would be 6 buildings with a mix of uses including residential, offices, food and drink uses with ancillary retail and a community use together with a multi storey car park, underground parking and an area of public open space. The Island site opposite would be predominantly for residential use with some ground floor food and drink uses around an area of public open space. On the Island site an area of townhouses was also proposed. Underground car parking would be provided on both sides of the river. Overall, approximately one third of the site would be public open space

  In response to questions raised on the site visit by Members, the Head of Planning Services stated that the proposed levels related to the need to address flooding issues and build in mitigation measures required by the Flood Alleviation Scheme, with the ground level of buildings on the Kirkstall Road Riverside site being set half a storey higher than the existing ground level of the site.  The Island site was much higher and the excavation would be to a depth of 1.5 -1.8m with the development set at the same as the footpath to the canal.

  In terms of flood risk, Members were informed that the greatest risk was from Kirkstall Road as this was the lowest point and to address this, no ground level residential accommodation would be included on this site

  Details in the design code indicated the erection of 14 buildings across both sites, with the buildings on the Kirkstall Road Riverside site being maximum 9-10 storeys in height.  Smaller scale buildings ie 3-8 storeys were proposed for the Island site with the opportunity for a taller, landmark building being sited at the narrowest point of the site

  Access arrangements were outlined, with Panel being informed that the main vehicular access to the mixed-use site would be from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for alterations and extension to form officers and A3/A4 bar/restaurant development and erection of a 5 storey office block with basement car parking and public landscape area, along with a Conservation Application for the demolition of the Mission Hut and 28 The Calls, Leeds. The Panel previously considered a report on the proposals 1^st July 2010 (minute 6 refers)

(Report attached)

  Further to minute 6 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 1^st July 2010 where Panel deferred consideration of a riverside development at 14-28 The Calls for additional information, the Panel considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

  Plans, drawings, graphics and an image of Atkinson Grimshaw’s 1880 painting ‘Leeds Bridge’ were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report and referred to the areas where Members had sought additional information and how these aspects had been addressed, these being:

·  landscaping provision – additional soft landscaping was proposed with an increase in the number of trees being provided along the terrace, with these being Alders which were waterside trees and the addition of a raised stone planter to replace the ‘contemplation’ space

·  the design and position of the pedestrian crossing – that Members’ comments expressed at the previous meeting had been considered, however as The Calls formed part of the loop road around the city centre, a crossing area which gave priority to pedestrians was likely to result in accidents, with evidence of this having occurred in similar locations.  In terms of using cobbles/sett paving to complement the existing cobbles on The Calls, these would not be suitable for pedestrians and wheelchair users and changes to surfacing would require extensive construction and would be prohibitive on the grounds of cost.  In view of this, a standard signalised pedestrian crossing was the preferred approach

·  the visual height of the Warehouse Hill building together with the detailing of its base – the visual impact of this building had been reduced through raising the brick balustrade and reducing the depth of the roof covering. In respect of the stone plinth, this would incorporate further detailing at each course. The Civic Architect, Mr Thorp, highlighted the similarities which now existed between this building and the one depicted in Grimshaw’s 1880 painting

·  the detailing of the riverside elevation of the Atkinson building – that a punched vertical emphasis within a brick elevation was now proposed

A request for an extension of the time limit from 3 years to 5 years had

been sought to provide the applicant with a level of flexibility, if Panel was minded to approve the application, with Officers stating they were satisfied with this

The Panel discussed the revisions and commented on the following

matters:

·  the proposed demolition of 24 The Calls and whether it had been established that this building could not be retained

·  concerns at the proposed tree species with the view that Willows might be more suitable

·  whether the view against using cobbles/sett paving was due to traffic noise in view of this part being the least used section of the loop road

·  that this was a special part of the city and that a standard highways solution might not be appropriate in this location and could look incongruous

·  whether there was a need for a pedestrian crossing to be provided

·  that a 5 year time limit attached to any approval  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application setting out proposed alterations to public open space at Victoria Gardens, The Headrow, Leeds LS1

(Report attached)

  Plans, graphics and historical images were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for alterations to Victoria Gardens at the Headrow which were to be wholly sponsored by Marks and Spencer PLC to mark their centenary and links with the city

  The Civic Architect, Mr Thorp, outlined the history of the site with Members being informed that the original intention had been to implement Sir Reginald Blomfield’s 1925 scheme for a building on the Victoria Gardens site which mirrored that on the opposite side of the Headrow, formerly the Leeds Permanent Building Society.  Whilst Sir Reginald had begun to implement his scheme at this corner and progressed down to Appleyard’s Petrol Filling Station in Eastgate, the Council reconsidered the adjacent area with the original proposal being discounted and Victoria Gardens being completed during World War II, with the War Memorial being resited there from City Square

  In 1996 there had been a further opportunity to refurbish this area, however the Millennium Commission had selected Millennium Square as the primary project to receive funding, leaving Victoria Gardens in need of some improvement

  The Head of Planning Services stated that the area was an important feature and was critical in terms of event space in the city. Whilst the basic form of the space would remain the same, the proposals would remove the raised step between the planters to create a level access from all parts of the site; replace the cracked stone slabs; provide new seating, litter bins and signage; upgrade the large chess boards and introduce smaller boards into the coping stones of the existing planters and replace the trees along The Headrow frontage with 26 London Plane Trees. These would be clipped in a square shape on a clear stem which would be a minimum of 2.4m in height and would be uplit and underplanted with early spring flowering bulbs

  Members were informed that the Victoria Cross and Leeds PALS memorials would be retained as would the Italian Alder, the Joseph Beuys Oak and the two Oaks in front of the library, although these two trees would be subject to some crown pruning

  The Panel was informed that the proposals provided the opportunity for further trees to be planted in the city centre.  Whilst a condition to this effect had been included, Recreation Services had indicated they were not unsympathetic to this and if minded to approve the application, condition 7 requiring submission of off site tree planting adjacent to the Civic Hall should be deleted to enable this to be resolved between the Chief Planning Officer and the Chief Recreation Officer

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  that whilst the offer of works to Victoria Gardens was welcomed, there were other areas around the city in more need of attention

·  that there should be no change to the name of the gardens

·  that ideally the area outside the Town Hall would benefit from being included in the proposals, but an acceptance that the funding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer providing an update statement on the applications for the change of use including refurbishment and extensions to two church buildings with 2 flats, to form offices and 20 flats, and erection of a part 4 part 5 storey block comprising office and 31 flats, with car parking; along with a Conservation Application to demolish an office building and a Listed Building Application for the partial demolition and making good of a boundary wall. The Panel previously considered a report on the proposals on 1^st July 2010 (minute 7 refers)

(Report attached)

  Further to minute 7 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 1^st July 2010 where Panel deferred determination of applications for the redevelopment of St Peter’s Hall and House together with Chantrell House, Leeds Parish Church, Kirkgate, Members considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer seeking Panel’s comments on the design principles outlined in the submitted report and presented to the Panel by the Civic Architect

  Plans, drawings, graphics, photographs including historical images of the former school adjacent to Leeds Parish Church were displayed at the meeting

  The Civic Architect, Mr Thorp, outlined the work undertaken since the meeting in July to address some of the issues raised by Members in order to take the scheme forward

  In terms of St Peter’s Hall, Members were informed that the elevation disliked by Panel in the previous scheme had been removed with consideration being given to a ground floor extension only with stair and lift arrangement with a possible conservatory being included

  On St Peter’s House, an increase in height was being considered to reflect the height of the properties on the opposite side of the street and an extension which was angled at the side to maintain the view through to the Parish Church

  The idea for Chantrell House was to provide a gabled roof building which would give reference back to the former school building which had previously existed on the site but which would be smaller in footprint to maintain views of the Parish Church and reduce the impact on Chantrell Court

  Members were advised that there was limited potential for different uses due to the site being in a flood risk area

  Members commented on the proposals as follows:

·  whether the remains of the old building (the boundary wall) would be incorporated in the proposals

·  the need for top quality materials to be  used; possibly reclaimed materials

·  the increased height of Chantrell House; that it created better balance and if the views across were maintained, then this could be acceptable

·  concerns about the potential dominance of Chantrell House on Chantrell Court and whether the built form could be narrower pulling it away from Chantrell Court

·  on St Peter’s Hall, the need to understand how the positioning of the lift in the corner would work

·  that concerns remained about how the proposed extensions would relate in detail to the existing buildings

·  that some vertical emphasis could be considered on Chantrell House

·  the possibility of using mirrored glass within the scheme, particularly on gable ends

·  that a feature should be made of the original detailing within the scheme

·  concerns that although suggestions could be made on the scheme, these might not translate as envisaged

RESOLVED -  To note the report, the presentation and the comments

now made

  The Chief Planning Officer informed the Panel of a serious situation which was ongoing involving the Listed First White Cloth Hall at Kirkgate

  Members were informed that a lintel had recently become structurally unsound in the property next door to the First White Cloth Hall and because of this the whole structure was in danger of collapse and was a public safety risk

  Although every opportunity was being considered to save the historic building, it might be that The First White Cloth Hall would need to be demolished very shortly

  The Panel was informed that a proposal which had been submitted to Panel in the past envisaged the demolition and reconstruction of this building and that if its demolition was imminent, then the building’s materials would be salvaged, labelled and retained for use in the new building on the site

Thursday 16^th September 2010 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 16^th September 2010 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds