Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of a

pre-application presentation for amendments to approved Leeds City College building (application reference 16/05468/FU), on land at Quarry Hill, Leeds

(Report attached)

With reference to the meeting of 17^th November 2016 and the decision to approve the application subject to the satisfactory resolution of outstanding matters and conditions (Ref No.16/05468/FU). The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which sought the views of Members on a series of amendments to the overall scale and design of the buildings. 

Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

The Chief Planning Officer together with the applicant’s representatives addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the revised proposal and highlighted the following:

The proposed amendments to the approved scheme were summarised as follows:

Phase 1

·  A reduction in floor to floor levels from 4.1m to 3.6m and omission of levels 7 and 10 to the 2no. higher blocks on Eastgate (5 storeys to a maximum of 8 storeys, rather than 10 storeys);

·  Re-allocation of space removed from levels 7 and 10 to the courtyard terrace on level 02;

·  Reduction of parapet heights from 3000mm to 1500mm at lowest point to the 3no. blocks on Eastgate;

·  Removal of perforated anodised aluminium and replacement with frameless glazing with fritted/etched imagery on glass. This would create a similar effect to the aluminium with the potential to tie in with college branding;

·  Reduction in the width of the fins from 450mm to 300mm in single colour in the bronze spectrum;

·  Changes to the internal courtyard elevation modified to even out the

  proportion of glazing (50%) to cladding (50%). The cladding is   proposed as a flat panel rainscreen aluminium system in a gold/bronze   colour (lighter than bronze fins); and

·  The changes have a minor impact on the approved floor area for Phase 1 which increases from 15,480m2 to 15,609m2.

·  Disabled access would be provided from Eastgate

Phase 2

·  Phase 2 had been revised accordingly, and the overall height reduced, to enable the development to read as a family of buildings. The building height had been amended from 8 and 11 storeys (approved) to 8 and 10 storeys. The taller block on Eastgate has been reduced in height by 10.1m and the 8 storey block reduced by 3.5m.

·  This reduces the overall floor area approved for Phase 1 from 10,000m2 to 9,419m2.

It was suggested that the combination of changes to Phase 1 and 2 reduced the overall scale of the buildings in relation to the wider Quarry Hill site, including the Caddick Developments site immediately to the east

In response to Members questions the following issues were raised:

·  Would the reduction in floor space be sufficient to sustain the future development of the college

·  Had the vehicle egress and exit issues been satisfactorily addressed

·  Was funding in place for Phase 2 of the development

·  Was progress being made on proposals for public realm to tie in with the adjacent Caddick and West Yorkshire Play House developments

In providing a response to the above questions the Chief Planning Officer/ applicants representatives said: the reduction in floor space was still sufficient to sustain the future development of the college, vehicle movements to and from the site had been calculated and this issue was now considered resolved, Funding for Phase 2 of the development was being sought, but this phase was currently at the outline stage, in terms of proposals for  public realm to tie in with adjacent developments, it was reported that there was a design concept for the Quarry Hill cluster connection, it was on track, but as yet, was not fully funded.

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  Some Members took the view that the new scheme still delivered a high quality design, the reduction in height exposed buildings behind, which was a positive feature; the design was less over-whelming but met the needs of the college.

·  Other Members expressed disappointment at the new design suggesting it was inferior, bland, a cut price development in a prime part of the city.

In drawing the discussion to a conclusion Members provided the following feedback;

·  It was the view of the majority of Members that the resultant building design, whilst lower in scale remained acceptable.

·  The proposed reduction in height of the phase 2 building was acceptable

·  To accept that the subsequent application under Section 73 of the Act for revisions to the building be determined under powers delegated to the Chief Planning Officer, this applying only to Phase 1 of the development.

In summing up the Chair said that although the buildings were lower in scale it still delivered a quality design and met the needs of the college.

RESOLVED –

(i)  To note the details contained in the pre-application presentation

(ii)  That following the submission of the subsequent application under Section 73 of the Act for revisions to the building, final determination of the application (Phase 1 only) be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to any conditions deemed necessary or required by the Chief Planning Officer

(iii)  That the developers be thanked for their attendance and presentation