Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application for a ten storey block of 101 apartments with ground floor residents lounge, cinema room, gym and cycle storage room at 16-18 Manor Road, Holbeck, Leeds LS11 9AH.

 

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an application for a ten storey block of 101 apartments with ground floor resident’s lounge, cinema room, gym and cycle storage room at 16-18 Manor Road, Holbeck, Leeds, LS11 9AH.

 

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

 

The Planning Case Officer addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

 

·  The site is currently an unsightly, longstanding cleared vacant brownfield site (0.1 hectare) in the Holbeck Urban Village area of Leeds South Bank, in the designated City Centre. The site is on the south side of Manor Road at the junction with David Street. The immediate surrounding context includes Manor Mills an 8-9 storey residential development to the east, a single storey telecommunications centre (with permission for office use) to the west, and a single storey warehouse to the south. The wider context includes the Dandara residential development, approved at Plans Panel in 2015, and now under construction, and the 8 storey offices at The Mint on Sweet Street. Opposite the site to the east of David Street are 3 storey beige brick offices, and to the west are the single storey industrial units at Leodis Court. The Grade I listed Temple Works, a former flax spinning mill in the Egyptian revival style, lies at the western end of Manor Road at the junction with Marshall Street, which is also the eastern edge of the Holbeck Conservation Area. The immediate surrounding area offers a wide variety of architectural styles and materials including red brick, light and dark brown brick, render, glazed balconies, copper cladding, and natural stone.

 

·  There is an existing pedestrian route to the west of the site, this is in the ownership of the adjoining landowner. This is not public highway, but it is a claimed Public Right of Way.

 

·  The site lies in flood risk zone 2.

 

·  The proposal is for 101 flats, made up of 21 studio flats, 56 one-bed flats, 20 two-bed flats and 4 three-bed flats. These would be made available to the Private Rented Sector (PRS). No car parking is proposed as part of the scheme. The building would be 10 storeys, including the top 2 storeys set back to create a roof terrace. The architectural concept for the building is a folded sculptural metal form, finished in bronze cladding, with balconies and screens created by the folds in the façade. The former use of the site was a metal fabrication business.

 

·  In terms of dwelling size, the following flat sizes would be provided:

 

 

- Studio flat 31sqm

- One-bed flat 39sqm or 41sqm

- Two-bed flat 63sqm

- Three-bed flat 74sqm

 

·  At ground floor, the entrance to the flats would be on the Manor Road frontage at the western end of the building. The proposal would also include a new pedestrian/cycle link between Manor Road and Siddall Street under an over-sailing part of the building. This would create a direct link between David Street and Sweet Street. The route would be activated by a resident’s gym, and would be lit and covered by CCTV. The majority of the route would be overlooked by flats at Manor Mills. The proposal would provide additional natural surveillance from the building entrance close to the corner of the building, and from upper floors over the existing indirect pedestrian route that runs to the west of the site.

 

·  Further work on the wind impact of the proposal had highlighted that there was a potential for windy conditions at the NW corner of the building close to the proposed entrance. To mitigate this impact it is proposed to re-arrange the stepped approach and provide screens either side of the entrance. This approach is considered acceptable by the Council’s wind consultant and details of the mitigation measures would be controlled by planning condition.

 

·  Historic England had confirmed that they did not object to the proposal but had commented that the height of the proposed building would be greater than the adjacent Manor Mill building. In response the proposed building would be one storey taller than Manor Mill but would have its top two floors set back so that visually it would appear compatible with the scale of Manor Mills. The building would also be 6 metres lower than The Mint (which also forms part of this City block), which has less storeys but greater floor to ceiling heights due to its office use.

 

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

 

·  With regard to the existing pedestrian route to the west of the site (Not a public highway, but claimed as a Public Right of Way) would the applicant fund the process to formally designate this route as a public right of way

·  In respect of affordable housing provision, had a Housing Association to manage the affordable flats been identified

·  Further clarification was sought on the disabled access arrangements

·  Could the existing London Plain tree be retained

·  Could the strip of land to the western side of the development be landscaped

·  The scheme proposed no parking spaces, could LCC officers clarify the justification for this approach

·  Had funding for the development been secured

·  What was the timescale for beginning of work on site

·  Was it considered the bin storage area was adequate

·  Did the accommodation meet the Nationally Described  Housing Standards

·  Could sample materials be provided

 

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

 

·  The applicant confirmed that they would consider funding the designation of the existing pedestrian route to the west of the site as a public right of way, however the land was not under their control and assistance from the city council would be required on the process to be followed.

·  The applicant confirmed that a Housing Association had been identified and discussion with the company were currently ongoing to deliver the affordable units on-site

·   In terms of the disabled access arrangements, it was confirmed that an access ramp would be provided to allow access up to the entrance

·  Officers confirmed that the London Plain tree was to be retained

·  Officers confirmed that the strip of land to the western side of the development was under the ownership of the city council and it was proposed to landscape this.

·  The applicant said the residential accommodation was targeted at residents between the ages of 18 – 35 years old who worked and lived in the city centre. Referring to the car parking provision census data for 2011, Highway Officers said that car ownership in the city centre was an average of 30% and suggested that given the short distance to the city centre, this was a good location for a zero parking scheme

·  The applicant confirmed that as yet the development was not 100% funded but it was hoped this would be achieved by Christmas 2017

·  Members were informed that the proposed timescale for work beginning on site was by May 2018

·   The applicant was of the view that the bin storage area was adequate

·  Members were informed that the accommodation would meet the Nationally Described  Housing Standards ( Paragraph 2.2 of the submitted report referred)

·  It was acknowledged that the provision of sample materials would be covered by condition

 

(Referring to car park provision within the city centre, the Chair said the applicant had made reference to unused car parking spaces within residential developments which are currently rented out to commuters. The Chair enquired whether further information could be provided on this issue by Council Officers) 

 

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

 

·  Members welcomed the proposal commenting that the development made a real statement, it was an attractive building and was a high quality design

·  The inclusion of a maintenance strategy was required

·  Members emphasised the need for sample materials to be provided

·  Future requests for parking permits should be resisted (with the exception of disabled visitor parking)

 

In summing up the Chair thanked the Developers for their attendance commenting that this was an impressive development and Members appeared to be supportive of the application.

 

RESOLVED – That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the satisfactory resolution of potential wind impact, and subject to the conditions specified in Appendix 1 of the submitted report (and any others which he might consider appropriate) and the completion of a Section 106 agreement to include the following obligations:

 

·  5% Affordable housing to be provided in accordance with details at section 10.8 of the submitted report

·  Sustainable travel fund £14,803

·  Car club contribution £10,000

·  Amendments to traffic regulation order to replace 3 pay and display bays to accommodate loading and car club £7,500

·  Revenue compensation for loss of 3 pay and display bays £18,000

·  Travel plan monitoring fee £2505

·  Public access through the site

·  Cooperation with local jobs and skills initiatives

·  Management fee £3000

 

In the event of the Section 106 not having been completed within 3 months of the resolution to grant planning permission, the final determination of the application shall be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer