Agenda and minutes

City Plans Panel
Thursday, 24th January, 2019 1.30 pm

Venue: Civic Hall, Leeds

Contact: John Grieve , 0113 3788662  Email: john.grieve@leeds.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

121.

Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

 

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. 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests.

 

With regard to Agenda Item 9, Application Nos 18/04579/FU and 18/04580/LI – Midland Mills, Silver Street, Holbeck; Councillor Anderson informed the Panel that he knew the architect.  He informed the Panel that he would be treating the applications with an open mind and was not pre-determined in his judgement.

 

 

122.

Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence (If any)

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors, C Gruen, A Khan and E Nash.

 

Councillors D Jenkins and A Wenham were in attendance as substitutes.

 

 

123.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 276 KB

To consider and approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 3rd January 2019.

 

 

(Copy attached)

Minutes:

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 January 2019 be confirmed as a correct record subject to the following amendments:

 

Minute 116 – Development of a Park and Ride Facility

 

·  To include reference to the provision of a changing places facility

·  To include reference to concerns regarding the design and layout of the road access to the site.

 

 

124.

Matters Arising from the Minutes

To consider any Matters Arising from the minutes.

Minutes:

Minute No 119 – Application 18/02481/FU – Doncaster Monk Bridge

 

There had been progress with securing additional affordable housing.  One extra unit could be provided using funds from the sustainable travel fund.  This had been agreed with the applicant and would leave approximately £50,000 in the sustainable travel fund.

 

 

125.

Application No. 18/06677/FU - The development of a Park and Ride facility with car parking for up to 1,200 cars; associated single storey terminus building, landscaping, CCTV, lighting, fencing and associated infrastructure, at land adjacent to the M621 Junction 7 Roundabout, bordered by Hunslet Cemetery to the west by the A61 and the Motorway/A61 circulatory to the east and north, and the Middleton residential area to the south. pdf icon PDF 4 MB

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application which seeks the development of a Park and Ride facility with car parking for up to 1,200 cars; associated single storey terminus building, landscaping, CCTV, lighting, fencing and associated infrastructure, at land adjacent to the M621 Junction 7 Roundabout, bordered by Hunslet Cemetery to the west by the A61 and the Motorway/A61 circulatory to the east and north, and the Middleton residential area to the south.

 

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the development of a park and ride facility with car parking for up to 1,200 cars; associated single storey terminus building, landscaping, CCTV, lighting, fencing and associated infrastructure at land adjacent to the M621 Junction 7 Roundabout, bordered by Hunslet Cemetery to the west by the A61 and the motorway/A61 circulatory to the east and north and the Middleton residential area to the south.

 

The application had been considered at the previous meeting of the City Plans Panel when it had been deferred to allow for further detailed designs of the scheme to be submitted.

 

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:

 

·  The proposals presented a revised scheme following the previous meeting where concerns were expressed regarding the building design and landscaping.

·  The site was allocated for a Park and Ride Scheme in local plans and the proposals were compliant with policy.

·  There were no changes to access arrangements following the presentation at the previous meeting.

·  The terminus building would be a stone wall and weathered steel construction.  There had been no revisions to the footprint of the building but there had been alterations to the internal layout.

·  Features of the building would include a ‘green’ wall on the eastern elevation; a saw tooth roof pattern to fit in with other industrial buildings in the area and a changing places facility within the building.

·  Landscaping – it was proposed to retain as many of the existing trees as possible and there would be ornamental tree planting within the site.  There would be planting to separate the site from the adjacent cemetery with wildflower and woodland planting.

·  There was still a further consultation period following the design changes and the Panel was updated on further representations that had been received.

·  It was recommended to defer and delegate the approval of the application to the Chief Planning Officer.

 

A local resident addressed the Panel with concerns regarding the application.  These included the following:

 

·  Re-use of top soil – this had not been previously mentioned.

·  Future extensions – the report indicates there could be future applications for extensions to the scheme.

·  Parking restrictions on adjacent streets.

·  The ground was not suitable for the construction of any building.

·  Although it was considered there were some improvements it was felt that there should be further consultation with local residents.

 

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

 

·  The scheme had been revised following comments made at the previous meeting.

·  There were suitable construction solutions available for building on the site.

·  The landscape strategy plan provided a local amenity as well as screening.

·  The scheme would contribute to the citywide transport strategy.

 

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

 

·  Access and exit arrangements for the site.

·  A noise impact assessment had been carried out and it was concluded that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 125.

126.

Application Nos:18/04579/FU & 18/04580/LI - Refurbishment of Midland Mills and the construction of a 32 storey tower comprising a total of 306 apartments; flexible commercial space (class uses A1/A2/A3/A4/B1) creation of a public realm at Midland Mills, Silver Street, Holbeck, Leeds. And Listed Building Consent for demolition works to and the refurbishment of Midland Mills at Silver Street, Holbeck, Leeds. pdf icon PDF 412 KB

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application for the refurbishment of Midland Mills and the construction of a 32 storey tower comprising a total of 306 apartments; flexible commercial space (class uses A1/A2/A3/A4/B1) creation of a public realm at Midland Mills, Silver Street, Holbeck, Leeds. And Listed Building Consent for demolition works to and the refurbishment of Midland Mills at Silver Street, Holbeck, Leeds.

 

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the refurbishment of Midland Mills and the construction of a 32 storey tower comprising a total of 306 apartments; flexible commercial space (class uses A1/A2/A3/A4/B1) creation of a public realm and Listed Building Consent for demolition works to and the refurbishment of Midland Mills at Silver Street, Holbeck, Leeds.

 

Members visited the site prior to the meeting.  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:

 

·  A pre-application presentation had previously been considered by the Panel.

·  The scheme would consist of a new 32 storey tower block and refurbishment of Midland Mills.  It would mainly be residential with some commercial space.

·  Landscaping arrangements including the courtyard area.

·  Flood risk – there had been an objection from the Environment Agency over technical detail.  A submission regarding this had been made to the Environment Agency and it was thought that this should be satisfactory.  Should this not be the case, then it would be brought back to Plans Panel for consideration.

·  The use of green walls in the site which would also provide wind mitigation measures.  There was also a condition regarding wind mitigation.

·  There would not be any habitable accommodation on the ground floor.

·  The scheme would comprise of one, two and three bedroom apartments.

·  The roof on the Midland Mills building would be replaced and extensions to the building would be removed.

·  It was felt to be a positive scheme with the regeneration and re-use of Midland Mills and it was recommended that the application be approved.

 

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

 

·  Level access arrangements to the site and buildings.

·  Materials to be used would be subject to condition.

·  The applicant was in discussion with Network Rail regarding the viaduct. It was also suggested that there should be discussion with regards to the railway bridge over Silver Street which was in need of re-painting.

·  The development would not be phased and there was an undertaking to carry out the works on the tower and the mill building simultaneously.  Spaces in the mill would be used by the contractor during construction of the tower.

·  The businesses that currently occupied the mill building were on short term leases and were working with the site owner to find alternative accommodation in South Leeds.

·  Environmental benefits – there was no car parking for residents and the flats would be aimed at people working in the city centre.  The tower building would be heavily insulated and would have a low demand for heating.

·  Tree planting would provide visual amenity and wind mitigation.

·  Recycling facilities would be available as part of the bin storage.

·  All proposed residential units will accord with the guidance set out in the Leeds Standard and the Government’s Technical Housing Standards – Nationally Described Space Standard.

·  Some concern regarding the glass finish at the top of the tower.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 126.

127.

PREAPP/18/00666 - Pre- Application proposal for residential-led mixed use scheme comprising approx. 23,000 sq.m GEA and the following uses: Commercial (Class A1) - 470.0 sq.m GEA; Residential (Class C3) - 302 dwelling houses including a mixture of apartments (266) and townhouses (36); and a total of up to 351 car parking spaces are also proposed to land
at Kirkstall Hill, Kirkstall, Leeds LS5 3BH
pdf icon PDF 587 KB

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of a pre- application proposal for residential-led mixed use scheme comprising approx. 23,000 sq.m GEA and the following uses: Commercial (Class A1) - 470.0 sq.m GEA; Residential (Class C3) - 302 dwelling houses including a mixture of apartments (266) and townhouses (36); and a total of up to 351 car parking spaces are also proposed to land at Kirkstall Hill, Kirkstall, Leeds,

LS5 3BH

 

 

(Report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented a pre-application proposal for residential led mixed use scheme comprising approx. 23,000 sq.m GEA and the following uses: Commercial (Class A1) - 470.0 sq.m GEA; Residential (Class C3) - 302 dwelling houses including a mixture of apartments (266) and townhouses (36); and a total of up to 351 car parking spaces are also proposed to land at Kirkstall Hill, Kirkstall, Leeds LS5 3BH.

 

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

 

The applicant’s representatives presented the proposals.  Issues highlighted included the following

 

·  The applicant was experienced in developing specialised mixed use brownfield sites and creating a quality environment and sustainable community.  Examples of other developments across the UK were shown.

·  Challenges due to the gradient of the site.  There was a 30 metre difference in levels.

·  History of previous uses at the site.

·  Constraints due to the heavy local traffic.

·  The emerging design reflected the existing layout of the area with roads through the site.

·  The proposals would include a mixture of townhouses and apartments which would be mixed together throughout the site.

·  Landscaping details

·  Vehicular access to the site

·  There would be undercroft parking throughout the site

 

A Local Ward Councillor addressed the Panel.  Issues highlighted included the following:

 

·  The proposals were broadly welcomed.

·  More affordable housing would be preferred.

·  Some concern regarding the height of the proposed buildings.

·  Concern regarding significant traffic increase from this and other sites.

·  Limited parking may lead to overspill parking on local streets.

·  If there was to be off site greenspace contributions it would be preferred if these could be used for the Kirkstall Valley Nature Reserve and riverside.

·  Possible signalisation of Beecroft Street.

 

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

 

·  Traffic became gridlocked at both ends of Beecroft Street and would need regulating with traffic signals and pedestrian facilities.  Modifications at the Morris Lane junction would also help to ease congestion.

·  The site was well connected to sustainable facilities and transport with bus routes and cycle routes.

·  Space standards would be met.

·  The corner of the site at Kirkstall Hill and Kirkstall Lane had been identified for a retail/commercial unit.  This was proposed to be the only four storey element of the proposals.

·  There was not a great pressure on school places in the area.

·  The overgrown area at the corner of the site was under the ownership of the Council.  There had been discussions regarding clearing the overgrowth.

·  Inclusion of electric vehicle charging points.

·  Whether a cycle lane could be incorporated from Kirkstall Hill to Kirkstall Lane.

·  Inclusion of chimneys on the dwellings.

·  The proposals were more practical than previous schemes that had been put forward for this site.

·  Design and materials to be used.  It would be pleasing to see a variety of materials to reflect those of the area.

·  A request that an Edward VII post box opposite the disused post office  ...  view the full minutes text for item 127.

128.

Application 18/05017/FU - Removal of condition 50 (MLLR delivery) of approval 16/07938/OT, on land Between Barrowby Lane and Manston Lane, Thorpe Park, Leeds - Update Report pdf icon PDF 136 KB

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which provides an update on Application 18/05017/FU - Removal of condition 50 (MLLR delivery) of approval 16/07938/OT, on land Between Barrowby Lane and Manston Lane, Thorpe Park, Leeds.

 

 

(Report attached)

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the removal of Condition 50 (MLLR delivery) of approval 16/07938/OT on land between Barrowby Lane and Manston Lane, Thorpe Park, Leeds.

 

Members were informed that this report had been submitted as part of the agreement to bring regular updates to Panel regarding the Manston Lane Link Road (MLLR).  The work was currently on schedule and it was due to be completed in April 2019.

 

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

 

 

129.

Date and Time of Next Meeting

To note that the next meeting will take place on Thursday, 14th February 2019 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds.

Minutes:

Thursday, 14 February 2019 at 1.30 p.m.