Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed all present to the meeting and invited officers and Members of the Panel to briefly introduce themselves. Mr J Thorp, the Civic Architect for the City, attended the meeting and introduced colleagues from the Design Services Team.

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

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

No formal late items of business were added to the agenda; however Members were in receipt of a copy of a late letter of representation from English Heritage relating to the St Peters Church applications. This had been submitted after the despatch of the agenda for the meeting. The Chair agreed that the representation would be taken into account during consideration of the applications (minute 43 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

Councillor B Selby – Applications 09/03230/FU; 09/03280/CA & 09/03397/LI St Peters Church – declared a personal interest as a member of English Heritage which had commented on the proposals (minute 43 refers)

Councillor Colin Campbell - Applications 09/03230/FU; 09/03280/CA & 09/03397/LI St Peters Church – declared a personal interest as a member of English Heritage which had commented on the proposals (minute 43 refers)

Councillor J Monaghan – Application 08/054440/FU Globe Road/ Water Lane and Applications 09/03230/FU; 09/03280/CA & 09/03397/LI St Peters Church – declared a personal interest in both items as a member of Leeds Civic Trust which had made comments on the proposals (minutes 42 and 43 refer respectively)

Councillor C Fox - Application 08/054440/FU Globe Road/ Water Lane – declared a personal interest as a local authority appointed member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as METRO had commented on the proposals (minute 42 refers)

Councillor M Coulson - Application 08/054440/FU Globe Road/ Water Lane – declared a personal interest as a local authority appointed member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as METRO had commented on the proposals although he stated he had not attended any meetings where the proposals had been discussed. (minute 42 refers)

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S Hamilton, G Latty and Nash. The Chair welcomed Councillors Coulson, Fox and R Grahame respectively as substitute members for this meeting

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 16^th September 2010

(minutes attached)

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 16^th September 2010 be approved as a correct record

  White Cloth Hall (minute 31)

Mr J Thorp, Civic Architect for the City, provided an update on the current situation regarding the first White Cloth Hall, Kirkgate. Slides showing recent scale of the collapse and necessary demolition works were displayed along with a slide showing the painting of Kirkgate by L Grimshaw dated 1895 for context.

Mr Thorp explained the collapse had revealed the speculative aspects of the colonnade feature to White Cloth Hall, the Victorian cellars and views through to the Corn Exchange from Kirkgate. He reported that the site owner had agreed to remove the Victorian infill from the cellars in order for an archaeological dig to be undertaken to see if any remnants of the mediaeval Hospitium believed to have been on this site could be found. Furthermore the owner had confirmed a willingness to adopt a vehicle to progress the restoration of the White Cloth Hall in conjunction with guardians such as LCC or English Heritage and a working party had been established to progress restoration works and address comments of English Heritage. Mr Thorp reported that the Executive Member with responsibility for Development & Regeneration had visited the site and had been briefed. Councillor Nash as the Heritage Champion would be briefed shortly.

Members reiterated their previous request that a letter be sent to the Executive Member for Development & Regeneration setting out the Panel’s earlier comments regarding the importance of the White Cloth Hall to the City and their discussions on the possibility of LCC purchasing the building and the whole row

  Toronto Square

The Head of Planning Services presented information on the recent court ruling on the legal claim involving the “right to light” brought by M Heaney against Highgrove and their development of 2 floors of office accommodation to Toronto Square. The Court had ruled that one third of the new build required demolition. This ruling highlighted what rights were available under Common and Civil Law. It was noted that Highgrove had appealed the outcome, however if the judgement was upheld, Highgrove would need to make a planning application for the demolition works which would require Panel approval.

Members discussed the implications for LCC as permission had been granted by Panel and works completed in 2009. Officers responded that LCC would strongly resist being implicated in any future action, as there was an acceptable distance of 22m between the new build and the affected property owned by M Heaney. However the case did serve as a warning to prospective developers to review any historical covenants attached to land they proposed to develop.

(Councillor Hamilton withdrew from the meeting for a short while prior to the consideration of the next item)

Further to minute 14 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 22^nd July 2010 where Panel deferred determination of the application for a 5 storey 78 bedroom hotel, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

Further to minute 14 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held 22^nd July 2010, when Members deferred determination of the application, the Chief Planning Officer submitted a report setting out the response from the applicant to the issues raised by the Panel.

Plans, architects drawings and photographs of the site were displayed at the meeting along with slides showing the earlier scheme for reference. Samples of the brick and zinc materials proposed for the scheme were also available for Members to view. Officers highlighted the revisions to the scheme including

·  the relocation of the reception area/main entrance

·  removal of the “active” element from the streetscene

·  relocation of the solar panels

·  the views from street level of the plant room were now obscured by parapets although the plant room may still be visible from further away

·  removal of the copper elements from the scheme. Zinc or brick had replaced some of the features previously indicated as copper.

·  a uniform window design had been introduced to the south elevations to provided a strong vertical feel with recessed windows

Officers reported that 75% of the ground floor elevation would be glazed to provide activity and interest at ground level. The simplicity of the elevations and the use of glazing/brick/stone would reflect the historic buildings in the locality. This development was intended to be a subtle addition to the streetscene in order to respect the prominence of the Italianate Towers on Tower Works.

Slides of 3D computer graphics sowing the relationship of the new build adjacent to existing buildings were displayed with a slide showing the views retained to the Giotto Tower.

Officers highlighted the sustainability measures proposed with the application which would ensure the scheme met the BREEAM excellent standard. Officers also addressed parking issues as the developers had originally intended to develop this plot (5) and Plot 4B adjacent simultaneously with parking for this site underneath Plot 4B. Plot 5 was now to be developed as a stand alone site with no car parking. However officers stated their belief that this site could be sustained without dedicated car parking due to its proximity to the city centre and various public transport links.

Members acknowledged this was an awkward site to develop and commented that the revisions to the scheme addressed the issues they had previously raised. The Panel briefly discussed:

-  Ground floor lighting to enhance the building to be conditioned

-  The criteria by which the service units and plant had been relocated to minimise impact and having regard to the English Heritage comments to retain the views to the Italianate Tower

RESOLVED – That the application be approved in principle and final approval be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer subject to the specified conditions contained within the report and following the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to cover the following matters:

•   Public transport contribution of £119,276.

•   Holbeck Urban Village (HUV) public realm contribution of £322,050.

•   Travel Plan with monitoring fee of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

Further to minute 25 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 19^th August 2010 where Panel received a position statement on the latest proposals for a change of use including refurbishment and extensions to 2 church buildings with 2 flats to form offices and 16 flats and the erection of a 5 storey block comprising office and 21 flats with car parking together with Conservation Area application to demolish office and Listed Building Application for alterations for replacement gate in boundary wall; to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

Further to minute 25 of the Panel meeting held on 19^th August 2010 when Members received a position statement on the progress of the applications, the Chief Planning Officer submitted a further report on the proposed mixed use development at St Peter’s Church and Church Buildings and Chantrell House.

Plans; architects drawings; elevations and photographs of the site were displayed at the meeting along with graphics showing 3D modelling of the proposed development in situ. An historical photograph showing the former school building on the site was also displayed

The report set out the history of the applications and included an outline of the developers’ response to the matters discussed by the Panel previously. Officers highlighted the key matters to consider as

Views –

- Views through the site to St Peters Church had been retained through the redesign of the overall site layout

St Peters Hall –

-  the dark brick banding now wrapped around the new build and included the gable end and copper cladding to the staircore

-  this provided interest to the elevations and mirrored the brickwork pattern on the retained St Peters Hall

-  the realigning of the new build now revealed and reinstated a window to the side elevation of the existing St Peters Hall

-  The proposed new build would remove two “lean to” type extensions which would reveal more of the existing building. The old additions had masked some of the architectural features of St Peters Hall and had partially blocked the window to the side elevation.

St Peters House

-  Incorporation of blank windows to the side/rear provided relief and interest to that elevation

-  Officers updated the Panel on further discussions held with the developers on whether glazing could be introduced to this elevation

-  There was a suggestion that, as the bathrooms were indicated on the internal plan in the middle of this elevation, obscure glazed windows could be introduced

-  Officers also wished to consider further the merits of introducing small windows to the kitchen and/or living room areas to either side of the bathroom on this elevation. This would require further discussion and submission of details.

Chantrell House

-  5 storeys were now proposed although this new build had a smaller footprint than the original proposal and did not dogleg to the rear of the site

-  This block included the affordable housing provision

-  The design suggested a strong rhythm to the build with 2 gables to the Calls elevations, and 4 to each side elevation

Overall

-  the reduction in the overall scale of the proposals has resulted in a total of 37 flats (down from 52 originally)

-  the roof forms, gables and heights, tied in with the existing heights of buildings in the locality

-  the massing of the development echoed the built form of the former historical warehousing use of the locality

-  the materials proposed included copper and brick with stone sills/coping and slate for the roofs with the possibility  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

a)  Eastgate/Harewood Quarter

Members noted the request to provide the Area Planning Manager with dates in January 2011 when they would be available to attend a site visit to the development completed in Leicester by the same applicants

b)  Unauthorised car parks

Members noted that a verbal update on unauthorised car parks within the city centre would be provided to the next Panel meeting

FRIDAY 12^TH NOVEMBER 2010 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall Leeds

RESOLVED – To note the date and time of the next meeting as Friday 12^th November 2010 at 1.30 pm