Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on pre-application proposals for a mixed use development comprising three blocks of residential apartments, with ground floor commercial and office units, car parking and a landscape scheme and to receive a presentation on behalf of the developers

This is a pre-application presentation and no formal decision on the development will be taken, however it is an opportunity for Panel Members to ask questions, raise issues, seek clarification and comment on the proposals at this stage. A ward member or a nominated community representative has a maximum of 15 minutes to present their comments. 

(report attached)

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

  The Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the emerging proposals for a mixed use development at Granary Wharf car park, which was situated within the defined boundary of Holbeck Urban Village (HUV).  The Deputy Area Planning Manager informed Members that the proposals had been the subject of detailed discussions with Officers and the developer of the Tower Works site and had addressed significant heritage issues relating to the two sites.  The positive response to these issues and the work undertaken with the adjacent landowners provided comfort that a co-ordinated response to the heritage of the area would be a key part of both schemes

Members then received a presentation on the proposals on behalf of the developer, with information being provided which included:

·  the credentials of the developer in delivering high quality, developments in major Yorkshire cities, including Wakefield Waterfront and The Hepworth Gallery

·  that the proposals had been developed as part of an integrated approach with the adjacent Tower Works site as a holistic strategy was considered to be the most appropriate method for this area

·  that the extant approval from 2006 had been office use, whereas what was being proposed for this site was a residential-led scheme with a smaller element of office use with some ancillary A3 uses

·  connectivity and the creation of a boulevard to the Tower Works site and beyond to the wider HUV area

·  that three separate buildings were proposed , with undercroft car parking being provided under Block B

·  the internal layout of the upper floors, with an apartment layout being proposed with central atriums

·  generous sized 1, 2 and 3 bed apartments were to be provided

·  that the setting of the Lock-Keepers cottage would be respected in the scheme and the views of the Listed Towers would be retained

·  that in designing the facades of the buildings, the local vernacular had been the starting point and that inspiration had been drawn from warehousing typology in terms of banding; repeat elevations and deep brick reveals.  The importance of adding interest and depth through the brickwork was highlighted.  Members were advised that although the same materials would be used on all three buildings, the materials would be used differently

·  that a small number of projecting balconies would be provided, with these being of a robust design with glass cheeks

  The Panel discussed the proposals, with the main areas of comment relating to:

·  safety and security issues across the site which featured ginnels and alleys.  Members were informed that the areas would be clean, safe and well-lit and that proactive site management would be provided which would include CCTV although this would need to be integral to the design of the scheme

·  the aim for the site to be seamless with the Tower Works site and in the event of there being exposed walls, how these would be treated.  The developer’s representative advised that in the event of the other site not proceeding, an attractive, quality brickwork elevation would be provided

·  the possibility of including public art into the scheme and through it referencing the history of this area, including reference to the adjacent Leeds and Liverpool Canal

·  the timetable for commencement of the works.  Members were informed that the intention was to submit for full planning approval, and if this was granted it was hoped to be on site in mid 2016

·  the level of car parking being provided on the site with some concerns being raised that 43 spaces was insufficient.  It was noted there would be car clubs; that the site was in close proximity to the railway station and that in several major cities it was not unusual for there to be a limited amount of car parking on city centre residential schemes.  Whilst this might be accepted, concerns remained that for people working in Leeds, car parking provision was required

·  the need for a strategy to be developed to deal with the cars which would be displaced through the development of the site.  Discussion took place on the changing attitudes to car parking provision in recent years, with it being stated that several city centre schemes had parking provision which was not fully utilised.  The Chief Planning Officer stated that a car parking Supplementary Planning Document was to be brought in on the back of the Core Strategy which would take as its starting point the limiting and controlling of car parking alongside improvements to public transport including park and ride schemes, together with some re-provisioning of car parking in the City Centre.  There would also be a need to consider how to deal appropriately with the end of the temporary permissions in March 2017 for car parking for up to 3500 spaces in the City Centre, particularly as some of these sites could be redeveloped and that consideration would need to be given to the redevelopment of the Carlsberg Tetley site and the recently announced Burberry development

In response to the specific points raised in the report, the following

responses were provided:

·  that the principle of development were considered to be appropriate to Holbeck Urban Village

·  in terms of the emerging scale and massing of the proposals this was generally supported subject to detailing the appearance of the buildings fronting Water Lane which appeared ‘blocky’

·  on the landscaping proposals no information had yet been provided on these.  The Deputy Planning Manager advised that work was ongoing to create a car free, pedestrian friendly environment with good connectivity, especially to Tower Works, with Members being satisfied on this

·  that the scheme was welcomed as was the emerging high quality design

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

now made

  During consideration of this matter, Councillor Procter left the meeting