Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of applications seeking Full Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent for a new multidisciplinary physics and computing building incorporating alterations and extensions to the Old Mining Building at University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which sets out details of applications which sought full planning permission and listed building consent for a new multidisciplinary physics and computing building incorporating alterations and extensions to the “Old Mining Building” at University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds 2. 

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

The City Centre Team Leader addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

·  The site comprises three buildings and surrounding spaces, including two which have recently been demolished. The remaining “Old Mining” building is a three storey, grade II listed, building constructed as part of the Lanchester and Lodge phase of University development in the 1930’s, with the Chemistry Building and Brotherton Library, and the later Parkinson Building

·  The development would involve the construction of an extension to the rear and to the roof of the Old Mining building between Woodhouse Lane and St George’s Field. The area between the front of the building and Woodhouse Lane would be re-modelled to provide new, improved, public realm.

·  In total, 14 trees were identified for removal and 44 new trees were proposed. These would primarily be arranged to form and define the routes from Woodhouse Lane without obscuring views of the building. Planting beds would also respond to banded and radiating geometry to the front of Old Mining and the Chemistry Building. Lawned areas would be provided between these planting zones, directly accessible via new footways.

·  A new shared surface would be formed dissecting the space between Old Mining and the Chemistry Building. To control access and to give priority to pedestrians, rising bollards would be located close to the entrance, activated by an intercom system. The road would provide passing places for vehicles and access to three new disabled parking spaces, whilst connecting with the existing vehicular access to the Chemistry Building archway.

·  The vehicular access to the development’s service yard would be via Cemetery Road.

·  It is intended the development would achieve a BREEAM Excellent rating.

·  The facility is planned to open in Autumn 2019.

In response to Members questions, the following issues were discussed:

·  The need for so many footpaths to the front of the building

·  The solid glazed panels to the roof top extension to the Mining Building appeared to be out of character to the rest of the building

·  The proposed “buff coloured brick” for the western elevation did not blend in with the existing setting

·  The roof top plant should be positioned or screened so it cannot be viewed from ground level

·  An understanding of the proposed high level glazed links to adjoining buildings is required.

·  The Cemetery Road vehicle access appeared to be “over engineered” could it be simplified

·  Clarification was sought around vehicle movements to the building

·  Had the use of photovoltaic cells been considered

·  Could the inclusion of some public art be considered for the northern facing blank gable end to Woodhouse Lane

·  Concern was expressed about the proposed removal of a 200 year old Ash Tree, was it possible for the tree to be retained

In responding to the issues raised, the Chief Planning officer together with the applicant’s representative provided the following responses:

·  It was confirmed that priority had been given to establishing pedestrian links, 3 footpaths were proposed to cater for students arriving from all directions

·  Referring to the solid glazed panels, it was suggested that the proposal offered a modern interpretation to the established aesthetics of the lower floor

·  The buff coloured brick are intended to tie in with the lighter stone colour of the existing mining building

·  Rooftop plant would be designed into the building and some screening introduced

·  It was suggested the glazed links were similar in design to those on the Henry Moore Institute

·  It was intended that the Cemetery Road access would be made as efficient as possible, the existing barrier to be located further back

·  Referring to vehicle movements around the building, it was reported that a large amount of parking had been removed and servicing would be reduced to 1 or 2 deliveries per day leading to an overall reduction in vehicle movement

·  The use of photovoltaic cells had been considered in the context of the overall thermal envelope, but had been discounted because it was not considered to be a good capital return

·  It was reported that discussions were currently ongoing about an Art Strategy for University buildings and it may be possible that public art could be included in this development

·  It was not possible to retain the Ash Tree due to the need to provide a large amount of sub ground services which would interfere with the trees root system.

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  The proposed buff coloured brick to the western elevation remained a concern. The material needs to complement the existing building materials viewed from St. Georges Field

·  The Cemetery Road vehicle access arrangements be further reviewed

·  City Plans Panel should be consulted on the proposed art to the gable end facing Woodhouse Lane

The City Centre Team Leader clarified that the details of the western facing materials and the vehicle access works can be reviewed pursuant to proposed conditions 9 and 20 as set out in Appendix 1a of the submitted report. It was suggested that an additional condition is included requiring details of the public art work to the gable end to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority

In general Members were supportive of the development commenting that the majority of issues raised at the pre application stage had been satisfactorily addressed, the design of the extension was impressive and would complement the existing building.

In summing up the Chair said this was an excellent scheme and appeared to have the support of all Members

RESOLVED –

(i)  That Application No. 17/03618/FU be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the conditions specified in Appendix 1a of the submitted report and with the inclusion of an additional condition; requiring details of the gable end public art finish to be agreed in writing. ( and any others which may be consider appropriate) and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to include the following obligations:

·  Implementation of a Travel Plan

·  A Travel Plan Monitoring Fee of £3,356

·  An Employment and Training Plan

·  Section 106 Management Fee of £750

(ii)  That Listed Building Consent be grated in respect of Application No. 17/03619/LI subject to the conditions specified in Appendix 1b of the submitted report (and any other which he may consider appropriate)