Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed those in attendance to the August meeting of Plans Panel (City Centre) and asked Members and Officers to introduce themselves.

To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

There were no formal late items of business to consider, however the Chair agreed to accept the following as supplementary information:-

• Application 10/00923/OT – Outline Planning Application for Redevelopment of land at Meadow Road – Appendix 1 (Conditions)

(Agenda Item 7) (Minute 32 refers)

The document was not available at the time of the agenda despatch, but subsequently made available to the public on the Council’s website.

To disclose or draw attention to any disclosable pecuniary interests for the purposes of Section 31 of the Localism Act 2011 and paragraphs 13-18 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.  Also to declare any other significant interests which the Member wishes to declare in the public interest, in accordance with paragraphs 19-20 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no disclosable pecuniary and other interests declared at the meeting.

An apology for absence was received on behalf of Councillor N Taggart.

Notification had been received for Councillor M Harland to substitute for Councillor N Taggart.

To confirm, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 2^nd August 2012.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 2^nd August 2012 be confirmed as a correct record.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an Outline Planning Application for Redevelopment of Land at Meadow Road for Uses within the following classes B1, D2, C1, C3 (Up to 296 Residential Units) and Ancillary A1, A3, A4 and A5 Uses, including associated works for the formation of Site Access Roads at Land Bounded by Meadow Road, Jack Lane, Bowling Green Terrace and Trent Street, Leeds 11.

(Appendix 1 to follow)

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an outline planning application for redevelopment of land at Meadow Road for uses within the following classes B1, D2, C1, C3 (up to 296 residential units) and Ancillary A1, A3, A4 and A5 Uses, including associated works for the formation of Site Access Roads at Land Bounded by Meadow Road, Jack Lane, Bowling Green Terrace and Trent Street, Leeds 11.

Appended to the report were copies of the following documents for the information/comment of the meeting:-

• 10/00923/OT – Conditions (Appendix 1 refers)
• Extract of the Plans Panel (City Centre) minutes of the meeting held on 1^st July 2010 (Appendix 2 refers)

Members were shown detailed plans and photographs of the site and had previously visited the site prior to the meeting.

Officers briefly outlined the proposals contained in the submitted report.

In his presentation, the Senior Planner referred to a Plans Panel Members workshop which had taken place on 16^th September 2010 and informed Members that the completion of the Section 106 agreement remained outstanding as at today’s date. Specific reference was also made to reserved matters in this regard which would be addressed at a later stage in order to give the developer some flexibility as the scheme develops.

At the request of the Chair, the Principal Engineer, City Development briefly outlined the highway implications, works and access arrangements to the site with specific reference to the cycle routes and travel plan.

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific proposals of the application.

In summary, specific reference was made to the following issues:-

• Concerns expressed about the height of the tall building within the parameters of the site; the relationship of the said building with Bridgewater Place and that the outline permission was lacking detail and was based on trust

(The Senior Planner responded and outlined the following variations which would be dealt with individually:-

-  The scale of buildings would need to reflect the parameter plan

-  the application could have varied storey heights within the limits of the parameter plans

-  new parameter plans would be supplied with each reserved matters application which would be brought to Panel for agreement 

-  the design code provides further information regarding the scale and form of the tall building and would inform the details of the proposals at reserved matters stage

-  Bridgewater Place was 30 storeys in height and was located on the north-south ridge of tall buildings which characterised the city centre and was referred to in the Council’s tall building guidance which would be reflected by the proposed tall building on this site

• Clarification if the proposal could have a super casino; the need for ward members to be involved in the recruitment process of the Section 106 Jobs and Employment clause which should focus on the City & Hunslet and Beeston & Holbeck wards ; where affordable housing would be on the site

(The Senior Planner responded and outlined the following issues-

-  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer for a two storey and single storey side extension to form enlarged music venue with roof bar and terrace vver at the Faversham, 1-5 Springfield Mount, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9NG.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for a two storey and single storey side extension to form enlarged music venue with roof bar and terrace over at the Faversham, 1-5 Springfield Mount, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9NG.

Appended to the report was copy of the conditions attached to the application for the information/comment of the meeting (Appendix 1 refers).

Members were shown detailed plans and photographs of the site and had previously visited the site prior to the meeting.

Officers briefly outlined the proposals contained in the submitted report.

In his presentation, the Senior Planner informed the meeting that the extension would create a modern building designed to protect neighbouring amenities.

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific proposals of the application.

In summary, specific reference was made to the following issues:-

• Clarification of the how the smoking area would reduce noise nuisance
• The view expressed that the extension looked like ‘a window less box’ and that further work was required on the design and top storey proposals to make it more attractive to customers using the building
• The concerns expressed regarding the noise coming from the existing four speakers on the outdoor terrace, which was causing a general nuisance for local residents and whether or not the smokers area could be covered over in the winter
• The need for more restrictions to be applied to the outdoor terrace should it be approved at today’s meeting
• The need for the developer and the applicant to develop a stronger bond and trust with local residents and to limit weekday operations to help young families living in the area
• The need to address the materials used for the extension in view of complaints received from local Councillors and Resident Groups
• To welcome the fact that a toilet extension would be removed from the site and that the main entrance to the pub would be improved and restored
• The need for the top storey to be reduced in size
• The need for appropriate shrubbery to break up the appearance of the extension

At the request of the Chair, the Chief Planning Officer, Deputy Area Planning Manager and Senior Planners responded individually to the above issues.

The Senior Planner informed the meeting that the noise management plan would be conditioned to protect amenity. In relation to the four speakers located on the outdoor terrace, conditions would prevent outdoor music on the proposed terrace.  The Panel noted that the applicant had gone for a modern/contemporary look and that the introduction of more windows to the extension would result in a temptation to open more windows resulting in further noise nuisance.

The Deputy Area Planning Manager informed the meeting that the proposed extension and main building would be seen together only at an oblique angle and that the top floor roof light would not be visible from the south east or further a field due to the close proximity and dense planted nature of the south east  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer for a six storey and four storey building comprising 27 flats with undercroft car parking and Conservation Area application to demolish vacant college building, at Leeds College of Technology, East Street, Leeds, LS9 8DP

Referring to Minute 88 of the meeting held on 10^th May 2012, the report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for a six storey and four storey building comprising 27 flats with undercroft car parking and Conservation Area application to demolish vacant college building, at Leeds College of Technology, East Street, Leeds, LS9 8DP.

Appended to the report was copy of the non standard conditions attached to the application for the information/comment of the meeting (Appendix 1 refers).

Members were shown detailed plans and photographs of the site.

Officers briefly outlined the proposals contained in the submitted report.

It was reported that Members had made a number of comments at a Plans Panel Design workshop held on 5^th July 2012 which were detailed in section 5.0 of the report.

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific proposals of the application.

Specific reference was made to the outwood facing balconies on the north side of the building which it was considered would only be used as storage areas with a request that they be removed.

At the request of the Chair, the Deputy Area Planning Manager responded and informed the meeting that  the balconies were set into the building and not external protrusions and limited to 2 per floor facing East Street and Richmond Street. These  had been retained by the applicant to provide visual interest to the building and at about 600mm deep they were considered unlikely to be used as storage areas.

RESOLVED –

a) That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval, subject to the specified conditions (and any others which he might consider appropriate), and following completion of a Section 106 Agreement to cover the following additional matters:

- Affordable Housing provision of 2 units with one being submarket and

one being social rented

b) That in the circumstances where the Section 106 Agreement has not 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.

(The meeting was adjourned at 4.10pm at the conclusion of this item and reconvened at 4.30pm prior to considering the pre-application for 223 bedroom student accommodation development at Woodhouse Square, Woodhouse, Leeds 3).

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer and to receive a pre-application presentation in relation to 223 Bedroom Student Accommodation Development at Woodhouse Square, Woodhouse, Leeds 3.

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. There is no opportunity for public speaking about the proposals outlined in the presentation.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer introduced a pre-application presentation in relation to a proposed 223 Bedroom Student Accommodation Development at Woodhouse Square, Woodhouse, Leeds 3.

The following representatives attended and addressed the meeting:-

-  Stephen Walker and Jo Steel on behalf of Centrino Developments Limited

Members were shown detailed plans and photographs of the scheme.

The presentation highlighted the following key areas:-

• Location
• Site/Context photographs
• Existing Site Plan
• Listed Building and Conservations
• Sitelines
• Splayed walls to Back Claremont Grove
• Excavations/Hard/Soft landscaping
• Pedestrian Entrance and Service Vehicle lay by
• Upper Ground floor plan/Lower Ground floor plan with courtyard
• Proposed Elevation to Woodhouse Square
• Elevation materials including glazing
• Perspective view from Brandon Road
• Roof level detail

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific proposals of the pre-application.

In summary, specific reference was made to the following issues and the applicant team duly responded:-

• Clarification if the proposal was a traditional halls of residence or self contained flats

(The applicant responded and confirmed it would be a traditional halls of residence)

• Clarification if this was existing accommodation or new accommodation; the approximate date when the contractor would be on site and whether or not a car free scheme would work in this area

(The applicant responded and confirmed that it was new accommodation. The anticipated completion was September 2014 and that they would be open to further discussion regarding the merits of the car free scheme)

• Clarification if the applicant had undertaken market research in relation to this site

(The applicant responded and confirmed that market research had been undertaken)

• Clarification if the northern boundary of the building was a blank wall

(The applicant responded it would have angled windows to avoid overlooking but that it could be a blank wall on the upper levels and agreed to provide this information)

• Clarification of the potential loss of windows on the lower level of the building
• Clarification if there was a cross-section showing the relationship to the existing residential properties on Back Claremont Grove.

(The applicant responded that there wasn’t, but agreed to provide this information)

• The view expressed that the top storey level of the buildings were too ‘heavy handed’ and that removal of the overhanging eaves feature to the flat roof would significantly improve the appearance
• Clarification if it was possible to locate the plant on Back Claremont Grove and relocate the residential accommodation at basement level to face Woodhouse Square

(The applicant responded and confirmed that it would not be possible to re-locate residential accommodation in this way because internal amenity would be compromised )

• Concerns that the appearance of the building looked ‘bland’ within a Conservation area and whether the building could be made more traditional

(The applicant responded and welcomed the opportunity to consider some more design alternatives with planning officers)

• To place on record that not all Members of the Panel viewed the building as bland
• The need to address the proportion elements of the building to blend in with other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer and to receive a pre-application presentation in relation to a proposed Data Centre, Black Bull Street, South Bank, Leeds.

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. There is no opportunity for public speaking about the proposals outlined in the presentation.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer introduced a pre-application presentation in relation to a proposed Data Centre at Black Bull Street, South Bank, Leeds.

The following representatives attended and addressed the meeting:-

-  Peter Connolly, Yorkshire Design Group

-  Nick Barnes, Garnett Netherwood Architects

Members were shown detailed plans and photographs of the scheme and had previously visited the site prior to the meeting.

The presentation highlighted the following key areas:-

• Background details and photographs
• Introduction to Yorkshire Design Group
• Introduction to AQL
• Fibre Optik Network
• The site and surroundings
• Existing site Infrastucture
• Catalyst for future development
• Site permability and connectivity
• Illustrative Master Plan
• Built form and open spaces
• Aerial view from the South
• View looking North up Black Bull Street/View looking down Black Bull Street
• Views looking west from New Dock
• Site Plan of Data Centre
• View of Data Centre from Black Bull Street
• View of Data Centre

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific proposals of the pre-application.

In summary, specific reference was made to the following issues:-

• To welcome the presentation and the vision and to acknowledge the importance of the issue
• To welcome the proposal for providing combined heat and power to adjoining sites and buildings, but to acknowledge that traffic calming measures would be a challenge
• The need to address the design of the building with a view to making it more ‘human’ and to consider introducing further changes to improve the elevational appearance
• To welcome the proposal to establish a Data Centre in Leeds, but to suggest improvements to the overall appearance of the building and acknowledge that Black Bull Street was a potential hotspot for speeding traffic
• To welcome the landscaping proposals to the front of the building
• To propose that a Plans Panel Workshop be convened to discuss the design of the building prior to a full planning application being considered
• To request the applicant to consider illuminating the building at night

At the request of the Chair, the applicant responded to the issues raised at the meeting and acknowledged that the photographs did not do the building justice. In view of the importance of the application, he welcomed the opportunity of re-considering the design aspects of the building and re-affirmed that Black Bull Street did not require three lanes of traffic and that traffic calming measures were possible.

The Chief Planning Officer addressed the meeting and requested Members to support the proposals, in principle, and that he would have further discussions with the applicant with regards to work on the design of the building, travel implications, elevations and materials with a view to receiving a full planning application at the October meeting.

In concluding discussions, the Chair put forward the following specific matters for Members consideration:-

• is the principle of locating a data centre building on part of this site appropriate, given the potential importance of such a facility to the City Centre economy, and as a catalyst for the regeneration of the South Bank?  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

To note that the date and time of next meeting is Thursday 27^th September 2012 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds.

To note that the date and time of next meeting was Thursday 27^th September 2012 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds.

(The meeting concluded at 6.00pm)