Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of an application for a multi-level development up to 17 storeys with 625 residential apartments, commercial units (class A1 to A5, B1, D1 and D2) car parking, associated access, engineering works, landscape and public amenity space

(report attached)

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

  Officers presented the report which provided the current position on proposals for a major mixed-use development close to the city centre.  Panel noted that a pre-application presentation of the proposals had been made to Plans Panel City Centre on 12^th April 2012 (minute 78 refers)

  Members were informed that a mix of apartments across 7 units, were proposed which would include some 3 bedroom apartments and duplex units

  The main public open space would be in the centre of the site, although this was less than 10% of the site area and Officers were considering whether a lower level of POS could be accepted in return for the provision of a footbridge over the canal

  The main material proposed for the six lower buildings would be red brick which would provide a reference to the former industrial uses of this area.  The tall building set apart from the rest of the blocks would be in a black brick with some relief being provided through the inclusion of gold-coloured detailing on the balconies of this block

  To prevent graffiti on the elevation to the railway, green climbing plants were proposed which would also add interest and soften this area

  Details of the vehicular access arrangements were provided and Members were informed that a cycle lane would be introduced into the scheme

  A wind assessment had been submitted and this was currently being considered.  A viability statement had also been received which was being examined

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the need to see a sample of the gold-coloured cladding and to ensure that its appearance did not deteriorate over time.  Members were informed that sample materials would be provided and the materials would be conditioned

·  that the POS had to cater for families living on the site and from the image shown to Panel it appeared there was a road running through it

·  whether houses should be considered for the site as opposed to flats

·  the change of colour for the tall building and the reasons for this

·  the need for the colour of the red brick to resemble that used on the developments at Granary Wharf, rather than that on the Courts

·  the need for a more balanced housing structure in the city centre and the need for more family accommodation, e.g. houses/town houses in a traditional street pattern

·  concerns about the density of the proposals

·  the design of the buildings with a mix of views on this

·  that the provision of the bridge would be beneficial if it could be achieved and would provide a link to Granary Wharf and the southern entrance of the railway station

·  the importance of the views of the city to visitors arriving by train and the need for an image showing this development when entering Leeds station by rail

·  the likelihood that conventional housing on this site would not be viable

The Head of Planning Services stated that in terms of viability the site

was a marginal one.  Regarding the design of the scheme, the comments from the pre-application presentation had indicated the buildings at that time were too ‘blocky’ and the amendments made were in response to those comments.  In relation to the tall building, it was felt that elements of the nearby No.1 Whitehall were picked up in that block and that it was possible that the images provided did not fully indicate this

  On the quantum of development, it was important to ensure this was correct

  In response to the specific points raised in the report for Members’ comments, the following responses were provided:

·  that there were mixed views on the design approach adopted for the development and that a ‘wow factor’ was needed

·  that there was support to the approach to private and public outdoor amenity space but that if families were to be accommodated, more child-friendly play spaces were required and there should be increased green areas and reduced hard landscaping

·  that there was support for the proposed car parking in the scheme

RESOLVED -  To note the report and the comments now made

At the end of consideration of this matter, Councillors R Procter, G Latty, M Hamilton and T Leadley left the meeting