Agenda and minutes

A Members site visit was held in the morning in connection with the following proposals: Planning Application 16/01322/FU – 46 Burley Street, Leeds,

LS3 1LB, Planning Application 16/01921/FU – Kidacre Street, Hunslet, Leeds, LS10 1BD and PREAPP/16/00172 – Quarry Hill, Leeds 1 and was attended by Councillors:J McKenna, S McKenna, A Garthwaite, B Selby, C Macniven, C Campbell, T Leadley and D Blackburn

To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 15.2 of the Access to Information Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded)

(*In accordance with Procedure Rule 15.2, written notice of an appeal must be received by the Head of Governance Services at least 24 hours before the meeting)

There were no appeals against the refusal of inspection of documents.

1  To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.

2  To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.

3  If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-

  RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-

There were no resolutions to exclude the public.

There was one late item submitted to the agenda for consideration, agenda item 6 “Minutes of the Previous Meeting” which were not available at the time of agenda despatch. Minute No.31 refers.

To disclose or draw attention to any disclosable pecuniary interests for the purposes of Section 31 of the Localism Act 2011 and paragraphs 13-16 of the Members’ Code of Conduct. 

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive apologies for absence (If any)

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors: J Heselwood and R Procter with Councillors: S McKenna and B Anderson substituting respectively.

To receive and approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 7^th July 2016.

(Copy to follow)

With reference to Minute No.20 and the last bullet point in the section “in response to Members comments and questions” Members requested a minor amendment, to change the words “and the emerging design of the new building” to “but had mixed views about the emerging design” 

RESOLVED – That, with the inclusion of the above amendment, the minutes of the meeting held on the 7^th July 2016 be approved as a correct record.

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer setting out details of an application for a Student Residential Accommodation Building, comprising 87 studio flats, including ancillary communal facilities and retail unit, associated landscaping and car parking at 46 Burley Street, Leeds, LS3 1LB.

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an application for a Student Residential Accommodation Building, comprising 87 studio flats, including ancillary communal facilities and retail unit, associated landscaping and car parking at 46 Burley Street, Leeds, LS3 1LB

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

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

·  The scheme had been revised and was now part 4, part 5, part 6 storeys along Park Lane, and part 7, part 8 storeys along Burley Street.

·  The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the locality and the impact on surrounding amenities

·  The living conditions of the future occupiers of the proposed studio flats, with particular regard to internal living space, outlook, and external amenity space.

The Panel heard from Mr Richard Hellawell a resident of the nearby Kendal Walk, who highlighted the reasons for his and other neighbour’s objections to the development:

·  The development was excessive in height and bulk

·  The original plans were for a 4 storey development along Park Lane, following revisions to the plans that had now increased to 6 storeys.

·  The proposed development was over dominant in the area

·  Vistas and views may be lost

·  Some local residents were opposed to the principal of more high rise student blocks

·  Unacceptable noise levels may be generated as a consequence of the  development

Mr Simon Grundy, Indigo Planning Consultants speaking on behalf of the developers said:

·  The development would bring regeneration to the area

·  The site was an ideal location for Student Housing

·  Significant revisions had been made to the plans in terms of design and massing following consultation with interested parties

·  Of the 38 nearby properties, only 2 objections had been received, the vast majority of residents did not oppose the scheme

In response to Members comments and questions the following were discussed:

·  The principal of Student Housing on this site was acceptable

·  The size of the flats was acceptable

·  The building design was too bland, more articulation of the elevations was required

·  The creation of a base and frontage on the Park Lane elevation was suggested

·  Detail around the top of the building needed to be stronger

·   There were mixed views about whether the massing and bulk of the building required further attention

·  Further details about external finishing / materials was required 

RESOLVED - That determination of the application be deferred to allow the applicant time to address the comments made by Members in respect of the building design, the massing and bulk of the proposal and further details about external finishing / materials was required 

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application for the temporary use as residential site for Gypsies and Travellers with 8 pitches for 10 years at Kidacre Street, Hunslet, Leeds, LS10 1BD.

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an application seeking the temporary use as a residential site for Gypsy and Travellers with 8 pitches for 10 years at Kidacre Street, Hunslet, Leeds LS10 1BD.

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

It was reported that there had been one objection made to the application proposal from the owners of a neighbouring retail park.

Addressing the application the Chief Planning Officer highlighted the following issues:

·  A 3 year temporary planning permission had already been approved in principal subject to the provision of enhanced toilet and washing facilities (30^th October 2014)

·  To date the applicant had not fully carried out the approved works (Applicant Leeds City Council).

·  The application proposal was now seeking an extension to the time period for the use of the site for a further 10 year period.

·  The applicant had indicated a period of 6 months to undertake the outstanding works

·  There was an alternative Gypies and Travellers site located at Tulip Street, Leeds 10, which could be used whilst the outstanding works at Kidacre Street were completed

·  The Kidacre site would cease to operate if proposals for HS2 came on stream 

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

·  The principle of a Gypies and Travellers site at this location had previously been established

·  Only one objection to the new proposal had been received

·  The existing site was working well

·  Concern was expressed that the provision of enhanced toilet and washing facilities had still not been provided

·  Could assurances be provided that the necessary funding was available to carry out the outstanding works

·  the intention to decant the current occupants of the site whilst the outstanding works at the site were completed although at this stage an alternative decant site had not been identified by officers

In responding to the issue of funding, Officers confirmed that a report seeking the required funding would be the subject of a report to the Executive Board in September 2016.

The Chair offered to write to the Director of Environment and Housing on behalf of this Panel requesting the provision of the necessary funding to ensure the outstanding improvement works to the Kidacre Street site were provided.

RESOLVED - That the application be approved subject to the conditions specified in Appendix 1 of the submitted report and with an amendment to condition No. 8 to clarify that the condition refers to development of the proposed amenity blocks and any others that may be considered appropriate.

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of a Pre-application presentation for a proposed multi-level college development in up to four buildings at Quarry Hill, Leeds 1.

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report informing Members of the emerging proposals for a new Leeds City College campus development at Quarry Hill.

It was reported that Leeds City College was the largest further education establishment in the City and had pursued an estate rationalisation and

re-investment strategy since 2009. It was understood that the college’s ultimate goal was to have two campus sites in Leeds based at the Printworks, Hunslet Road and one other.

Officers reported that the College had originally considered a remodelled Park Lane site as the second site but had now moved to their preferred option to deliver a purpose built campus in the heart of what the College consider to be an education/cultural area based around Quarry Hill. The project would be funded in part by the College and a bid through the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP). The College programme scheduled the opening of the new campus for the 2018 academic year.

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

The applicant’s representatives addressed the Panel.  Issues highlighted included the following:

·  The new build college facility would be delivered in two phases

·  The buildings had been developed as a series of linked building blocks sitting on a plinth which followed the curved frontage of Eastgate.

·  The blocks step up in height; 5 to 10 stories

·  The proposals had been developed to align on key vistas and respect the entrance to the Quarry Hill at Gateway Court

·  The design facilitates the delivery of an external terrace area which provides the opportunity to integrate with Gateway Court

·  A route through the buildings, to the main entrance courtyard of the scheme, was proposed on the southern elevation to provide pedestrian permeability and provide greater integration with the public realm to the south

·  Some car parking was proposed, the majority for disabled parking on phase two of the development site.

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

·  Mixed views were expressed about the appearance of the proposed plinth, the use of good quality materials, arrangement of windows and an LED lighting scheme may address some of the issues raised

·  Further consideration was required to the connectivity with neighbouring sites: Victoria Gate, the West Yorkshire Playhouse and the Caddick development site. For example would it be possible for a footbridge to be provided linking Victoria Gate to the college/ Gateway Court.

·  There were mixed views that the building blocks appeared to lack finesse, “they were too masculine”

·  Members  welcomed the fact that the aim was to achieve BREEAM Excellent for the development

·  Greater emphasis on soft landscaping and the use of trees was highlighted

·  Further details around the need for roof top plant and the opportunities for providing green roofs and/or using roof mounted solar panels was required

·  The preparation of a travel plan for staff transferring from the Park Lane site to the new Quarry Hill site was required

·  In response to questions outlined in the report,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

To note that the next meeting will take place on Thursday 18^th August 2016 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds.

The next meeting was fixed for Thursday 18^th August 2016 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds.