Agenda item

Further to minute 25 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 19^th August 2010 where Panel received a position statement on the latest proposals for a change of use including refurbishment and extensions to 2 church buildings with 2 flats to form offices and 16 flats and the erection of a 5 storey block comprising office and 21 flats with car parking together with Conservation Area application to demolish office and Listed Building Application for alterations for replacement gate in boundary wall; to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

Further to minute 25 of the Panel meeting held on 19^th August 2010 when Members received a position statement on the progress of the applications, the Chief Planning Officer submitted a further report on the proposed mixed use development at St Peter’s Church and Church Buildings and Chantrell House.

Plans; architects drawings; elevations and photographs of the site were displayed at the meeting along with graphics showing 3D modelling of the proposed development in situ. An historical photograph showing the former school building on the site was also displayed

The report set out the history of the applications and included an outline of the developers’ response to the matters discussed by the Panel previously. Officers highlighted the key matters to consider as

Views –

- Views through the site to St Peters Church had been retained through the redesign of the overall site layout

St Peters Hall –

-  the dark brick banding now wrapped around the new build and included the gable end and copper cladding to the staircore

-  this provided interest to the elevations and mirrored the brickwork pattern on the retained St Peters Hall

-  the realigning of the new build now revealed and reinstated a window to the side elevation of the existing St Peters Hall

-  The proposed new build would remove two “lean to” type extensions which would reveal more of the existing building. The old additions had masked some of the architectural features of St Peters Hall and had partially blocked the window to the side elevation.

St Peters House

-  Incorporation of blank windows to the side/rear provided relief and interest to that elevation

-  Officers updated the Panel on further discussions held with the developers on whether glazing could be introduced to this elevation

-  There was a suggestion that, as the bathrooms were indicated on the internal plan in the middle of this elevation, obscure glazed windows could be introduced

-  Officers also wished to consider further the merits of introducing small windows to the kitchen and/or living room areas to either side of the bathroom on this elevation. This would require further discussion and submission of details.

Chantrell House

-  5 storeys were now proposed although this new build had a smaller footprint than the original proposal and did not dogleg to the rear of the site

-  This block included the affordable housing provision

-  The design suggested a strong rhythm to the build with 2 gables to the Calls elevations, and 4 to each side elevation

Overall

-  the reduction in the overall scale of the proposals has resulted in a total of 37 flats (down from 52 originally)

-  the roof forms, gables and heights, tied in with the existing heights of buildings in the locality

-  the massing of the development echoed the built form of the former historical warehousing use of the locality

-  the materials proposed included copper and brick with stone sills/coping and slate for the roofs with the possibility of zinc for the roof on the new build element.

Officers reported receipt of two letters of representation received from Leeds Civic Trust and English Heritage. The letters were tabled at the meeting as their contents were received too late for inclusion within the report on the agenda.

Mr J Thorp, the Civic Architect for the City, addressed the comments objecting to the scheme made by English Heritage which he felt arose from the developers seeking to strike a balance between the comments made throughout the planning process by the Civic Trust, English Heritage and Members of Plans Panel City Centre. It was noted that English Heritage had previously supported the scheme. Mr Thorp suggested the English Heritage comments concentrated on architectural refinements which could be addressed through the remainder of the planning process through the submission of 1:20 plans, cross sections and profiling.

(Councillor D Blackburn withdrew from the meeting for a short while at this point)

Members discussed the following in detail:

·  Clarified the date of the English Heritage letter

·  How the development enhanced the views of the churchyard. Officers responded that St Peter’s House now provided a splayed gable end which presented an “opening out” view of the churchyard and a better view of the church tower.

St Peters Hall –

·  Members reiterated their previous concerns that details to the side elevation of St Peter’s Hall would be lost. Officers responded the need for a certain quantum of development to provide for the upkeep of St Peters Church informed the design of the extension and overall development

·  Members regarded the Hall as an asset to the street scene and sought assurance that the extension would relate to the Hall in sufficient detail.

·  Some Members felt the details of the new build did not replicate the detail of the historic Hall. Officers responded that the “lean-to” buildings currently obscured the lower levels and half of the windows. Mr Thorp stated that the extension with the banding and gables would provide a link to; and engage with, the nineteenth century buildings on site but ultimately even with the extension, much more of the Hall was revealed

St Peter’s House –

·  concern that the side elevation would represent a blank façade without the window detail Officers responded that further investigation on any proposals for glazing for “return windows” for the sitting/living room area would be needed.

·  It was felt the plinth was a more challenging feature, but more details of this were required

The Panel welcomed the revisions made to the scheme and made the following comments:

-  expressed support for the proposals for Chantrell House

-  remained concerned about the treatment of St Peter’s Hall as Members felt they could not fully appreciate which features had been lost and which would be retained

-  regarded the relationship of the buildings to St Peter’s graveyard as being of utmost importance and that it would be beneficial to see how people currently used that space

-  the visual display did not provide enough detail on which to make a decision today

-  some Members wished to undertake a site visit to understand the proposals, particularly for St Peter’s Hall

Members reiterated their view that St Peter’s Hall and St Peter’s House were important buildings within the streetscene and as such it was very important to better understand the impact of the proposed extensions on the existing buildings. Members noted that not all the detail had been submitted. The Panel further noted the officer recommendation to defer and delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer, subject to a Section 106, which could take some months to complete and would facilitate time for the details to be submitted and for a site visit to be undertaken.

RESOLVED -

a) That the applications be approved in principle, and be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval, subject to the specified conditions (and any others which he might consider appropriate), the completion of preliminary archaeological investigation works on site, and following completing of a Section 106 Agreement to cover the following matters:

- on site affordable housing provision

- an agreement to undertake a list of repair and maintenance works to St Peter’s (Leeds Parish Church) within an agreed period,

- agreement to publicly accessible areas,

- a contribution of £4100.00 to a car club,

- employment and training opportunities for local people,

and the provision of two replacement trees within the site or the churchyard.

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.

b) that a further report be brought to the next Panel meeting presenting the details on the following matters over which Members expressed some concern

- The proposed detailing to the St Peter’s House western elevation

- Impact on the existing western gable and the detailing of the extension to St Peters Hall

c) Members also requested a site visit be undertaken prior to the next Panel meeting to provide an explanation of the matters detailed in b) above