Agenda item

To receive and consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding applications for the demolition of adjoining wings and erection of replacement buildings of between 4 and 13 storeys to create purpose-built student accommodation; Internal and external alterations to listed building including partial reinstatement of historic floor plan, revealment of side elevations, replacement of windows and replacement of stone steps to front entrance to facilitate level access. Hard and soft landscaping works.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the demolition of adjoining wings and erection of replacement buildings of between 4 and 13 storeys to create purpose-built student accommodation; internal and external alterations to listed building including partial reinstatement of historic floor plan, revealment of side elevations, replacement of windows and replacement of stone steps to front entrance to facilitate level access.  Hard and soft landscaping works at Springfield House, Hyde Street, Woodhouse, Leeds.

Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  There had been in-depth pre-application work that had involved design and conservation officers.

·  There was an objection from Historic England.  The site fell within the Woodhouse/Clarendon Road conservation area.  The building was Grade 2 listed and there were Grade 2 listed buildings and a Grade 2* listed building elsewhere within the university campus.

·  Springfield House was originally constructed as a residential villa and was listed in the 1960s.  It was converted into office use in the 1980s when the wings were added to the building.

·  Plans showing the layout of the existing wings to the building and the proposed wings were displayed.  The new proposals would cover a similar footprint with four and 5 storey blocks to the south west of the site and 10, 11 and 13 storeys to the north east.

·  Greenspace to the south east of the site would be retained.

·  Springfield House would remain at the heart of the site with the historic front door to be used as the main entrance.  There would be glazed links to the new wings.

·  Servicing for the building would be done from Clarendon Way and Seminary Street using existing accesses.

·  The listed building would be more clearly articulated with the new proposals.

·  Floor plans were displayed.  Amenity, bin storage and cycle storage would be at ground floor with further amenity at first floor level  There would be cluster flats and studio flats which would provide 343 bedspace and these would meet emerging space standards.

·  There would be photovoltaic panels on the roof.

·  Trees to the front of the building would be retained and the area to the south would have seating and planting.  There would be courtyard areas to the rear.  Materials for use in landscaping and plants for soft landscaping were displayed.

·  Elevation drawings were displayed.  Initial proposals had seen a reduction in the height of the proposed blocks at the south west which was considered more sensitive to the conservation area.  The different kinds of materials and details were also displayed.

·  View of the how the proposals would appear from surrounding areas were displayed.

·  There were outstanding highways issues to resolve.  These included pedestrian connections to the university due to the lack of dropped kerbs and the impact on disabled access.  The applicant was in discussions with the University and it was proposed to resolve these matters through delegated decision before final determination of the application.

·  Wind mitigation - although there was some protection from trees there needed to be a fixed wind baffle on site for permanent wind mitigation.  This would be covered by condition.

·  There would be a Section 106 agreement of £155,000 for offsite pedestrian and cycle improvements.

·  There had been a withdrawn objection from the owner of the Lodge building and they had now confirmed their support.

·  It was considered to be a good location for student accommodation and would provide an improvement to the street.  The application was recommended for approval subject to the resolution of highways matters and referral to the Secretary of State.

·  Samples of materials and a scale model were made available for Members inspection.

Objectors to the application addressed the Panel.  Issues highlighted included the following:

·  A representative of The Faversham addressed the Panel.  The Faversham was only 10 metres from the site and it was felt that their concerns had not been addressed and the proposals would be damaging to their business.  The venue had 60 wedding bookings this year and the outdoor areas to the premises were integral to the running of the business.  The proposals would overlook these outdoor areas and be intrusive to privacy.  Lighting from the blocks would also change the landscape.  The premises had operated for 21 years and these proposals would be detrimental to a business with over 30 full time employees.

·  A local resident and member of the Little London & Woodhouse Community Association addressed the Panel.  This was a massive development which would tower over existing buildings and impact on the grade 2 listed buildings destroying the aesthetic of this pace.  The proposals would also dwarf and trivialise Springfield House.  Granting this application would set a precedent for further tall buildings ibn the area and showed contempt for the aesthetics of the area, the conservation area and Leeds.

The applicant’s representatives were invited to address the Panel.  Issues highlighted included the following:

·  Pre-application work had ben carried out on the scheme since 2022.

·  It was appreciated that applications of this nature would attract concerns from neighbours and work had been carried out to address any concerns with supporting evidence especially with regards to noise, light and views.

·  It was acknowledged that there were impacts on heritage assets but many of these were positive and outweighed any negative impacts.  There were many enhancements to the listed building and conservation area.

·  Springfield House had previously been inward looking losing its sense of place.  The proposals would address this and bring its use back into the heart of the site.

·  The applicant had addressed concerns of objectors during the application process.

·  In response to questions from the Panel, discussion included the following:

o  Consultation – the applicant had engaged with objectors and shown the models and designs and explained how the design would still provide them with privacy.  There had also been acoustic assessments to demonstrate there would not be an issue with noise pollution.

o  Based on technical evidence there would be no loss of amenity with regard to sunlight and daylight or acoustic disturbance.  The issue of overlooking had been addressed through the design of the building.

o  There had been positive dialogue with the university regarding the highways enhancements that were required.

o  There would be the removal of some undergrowth to improve visibility and surveillance at the front of the site and lighting levels and cctv coverage would be improved.

o  There would be improvements for pedestrians crossing at Hyde Street/Clarendon Way and this would be completed under a Section 278 agreement.

o  There would be a segregated pedestrian route adjacent to the servicing area.

o  There would be the use of photovoltaics and air source heat pumps.  Should the district heating scheme extend up to that part of the city, that could also be used.

In response to questions and comments from the Panel, the following was discussed:

·  With regards to the objections from Historic England there were concerns regarding the taller element of the proposals but it was felt that the benefits of the scheme which improved the visibility of the listed building outweighed any harm.

·  Concern that the proposals would be the start of overdevelopment in the area.

·  The tallest element of the proposals had been situated at the least sensitive site where there were already buildings of significant mass.

·  The lower windows would not overlook The Faversham due to the change in ground levels and tree cover.  There would not be a detrimental impact on the privacy and some of the grounds were already overlooked.

·  It was requested that the Chair viewed the highways proposals prior to approval by delegated decision.

·  Concern regarding the taller elements of the proposal and a suggestion that the application be deferred for further consideration.

·  It was pleasing to see a purpose built student accommodation scheme to be in a more appropriate location.

·  This was a good quality design and would fit in with the area.

The officer recommendation was moved and seconded.

RESOLVED – That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to referral to the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities; resolution of the outstanding Highways Matter outlined in paragraphs 153-158 of the report; the specified conditions set out in Appendix 1 (and any amendment to these and addition to others which he might consider appropriate) and the completion of a Section 106 agreement to include the following obligations:

·  Travel Plan

·  Leeds City Council Travel Plan Review Fee of £5,405

·  Contributions for offsite cycling and walking improvements (Subject to agreement as per para 153 of the report)

·  Car Club contribution £10,000

·  Traffic Regulation Orders £10,000

·  Wayfinding signage £12,000

·  Control of student occupancy

·  Provision of public access through the site

·  On site greenspace provision

·  Local employment and skills

·  Section 106 monitoring fee

In the circumstances where the Section 106 has not been completed within 3 months of the Panel resolution to grant planning permission, the final determination of, or decision to finally dispose of, the application shall be delegated to the Chief planning Officer.