Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of major redevelopment, landscaping, car parking and associated highway works together with a Listed Building application to renovate and repair external fabric of building

(report attached)

  Further to minute 96 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 26^th May 2010 where Panel considered an extension of time application for a major mixed-use development at the Eastgate and Harewood Quarter (EHQ), Members considered a position statement on a revised application

  Plans, including the 1847 plan of Lady Lane, drawings, photographs, precedent images and graphics including a fly-through were displayed at the meeting.  A model showing the site within the wider context of the city was also provided

  The Head of Planning Services introduced the report; briefly outlined the planning history of the development; referred to the latest round of public consultation on the scheme which had taken place in September 2010 and to a visit made by Members and Officers to Leicester in January 2011 to view the recently completed Highcross Shopping Centre which was developed by Hammersons, the applicant for the EHQ scheme

  Officers presented the report and revised scheme and informed Members that the proposals were for a reduced scheme which was considered to be deliverable and viable and whilst still being a mixed-use development, would no longer include housing; a cinema; a church drop in facility or a hotel.  The proposed uses were for retail stores, restaurants, bars and offices in use classes A1,A2,A3,A4,A5 and B1, gym (D2), medical centre, crèche and multi-faith prayer room (D2) with associated development comprising changing places toilet facilities; new squares; public realm; landscaping; car parking and associated highway works

  The boundary of the site had also been revised and would not now extend to the former Appleyard’s filling station or Millgarth Police Station.  As a result, the development was sited wholly within the Prime Shopping Quarter so fully conformed to the Development Plan

  The application which had been submitted was for outline planning permission with all matters reserved although a considerable amount of detail had been provided with the outline application

  A large number of objections to the proposals had been received, with 26 further representations having been recorded from those listed in the report.  An additional letter of support had also been received.  Members would be updated on representations at the time the application was before them for determination

  Further details were provided on the reduced footprint of the site which arose from the fact that Millgarth Police Station had not yet been vacated, although permission had been obtained for a new police headquarters on Elland Road and that Ladybeck culvert ran through the site and under Millgarth which had caused difficulties in obtaining the floorspace layouts required by the main anchor store, John Lewis.  As a result, the proposed John Lewis store would be re-sited on the Harewood side of the scheme, close to the markets

  Members were informed of the parameters for the heights of the individual units, with these ranging from 3-4 storeys to 10-12 storeys, with parameters existing for widths of buildings also

  The Panel left the meeting room to view the model which was displayed in the ante-chamber and which set the context of the proposals within the wider city centre

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the massing of the John Lewis store and whether the bulk of this could be reduced by sinking the building further into the ground

·  the need to relate the building lines of the Market and its exits with those of the EHQ scheme

·  the importance of the exterior treatment of the car park and that it should not add to the existing harshness of York Road at this point

(Councillor Taggart joined the meeting at this point)

Councillor Taggart declared a personal interest as a member of the

Joint Services Committee which managed West Yorkshire Archaeological Advisory Service which had commented on the application

  Members returned to the meeting room and Officers continued with their presentation

  Details of the landscaping proposals were provided.  Although there was much hard landscaping, there would be the creation of two new squares; Templar Square which would be sited adjacent to Templar House Public House in the north-west corner of the site which would be a calmer, quieter and contemporary space and Eastgate Square which would be more vibrant and be the venue for a range of events and activities.  The resiting of this square in the revised proposals would involve the breaking through and removal of a section of the Blomfield buildings to the north of Eastgate to provide a new public space fronting on to the refurbished and re-used Listed Templar House.  A water feature was also proposed within the development

  The importance of the scheme in relation to Kirkgate Market had been considered by the applicant and it was felt that opportunities for the market could flow from that development, some of these being:

·  increased footfall across the site and an attraction to people visiting the city

·  increased parking

·  dedicated loading areas for market traders, which did not currently exist

·  additional trading opportunities to cater for the construction workers on the site

·  the design of the scheme which respected the Market and its historic street patterns and gave clear sight lines to the Market and improved connectivity

Within the site were the historic buildings of Lyons Works and Templar

House and the once dominant street, Lady Lane.  The retention of Lyons Works had been considered but as in the previous scheme, this was not possible.  However, Templar House which was Grade II Listed would be restored and enhanced.  The site of the original alignment of Lady Lane would be marked where it was being lost, with precedent images of the commemorative plaques marking the Berlin Wall being shown as possible ways to achieve this

  Details of the arcade/covered street were provided with the proposed roof form being of a glazed cloistered design.  A glazed bridge link, required by John Lewis from their store to the car park had been incorporated into the scheme.  Members were informed that this would be lightweight in appearance and would not hinder views up Eastgate

In relation to highways issues, the following information was provided:

·  George Street would be remodelled and the existing pay and display car park located to the north of George Street would be removed.  A drop-off point would be provided adjacent to the coach station; the taxi rank would be retained and there would be the provision of a new bus stop to accommodate the buses which were to be diverted along George Street that do not use the bus station.  There would also be dedicated loading bays for up to 20 transit vans with the standard 20 minutes being allowed for unloading.  Members were informed that the surveys which had been undertaken suggested this provision would be sufficient.  The carriageway would be wide enough to allow buses to comfortably pass the kerb side activities

·  the NGT proposals had been accommodated as a route had been planned which would wind its way through the scheme.  Similarly bus routes had been considered with Westbound buses on Eastgate being diverted via Vicar Lane and York Street and Eastbound buses via George Street and Vicar Lane.  A bus gate on Call Lane by the Corn Exchange was proposed to reduce the volume of general through traffic on York Street.  The need for additional bus stops was being reviewed to accommodate the changes in bus routing, which considered the number of passengers likely to wait at a stop and hence the time required to load.  The development would also support use of bicycles, with cycle links being provided from Mabgate to Eastgate

·  the design of the multi storey car park enabled vehicular access from Bridge Street and Vicar Lane

·  the John Lewis store would have a service yard off George Street and a customer collect area in the basement

·  details of the pedestrian routes were provided; the Eastgate roundabout would be retained and signalised pedestrian crossings would be sited on Vicar Lane; one would lead directly down to the John Lewis store from Sidney Street, with a second one providing a link to the Grand Arcade

Members commented on the following matters:

·  bus routes, with concerns that the proposals would result in more buses going along New Briggate which was already unpleasant due to buses and the various retail uses along the street

·  the possibility of buses coming eastwards turning on Albion Street to Merrion Street, with mixed views being expressed on this suggestion

·  whether there was the possibility of buses continuing down The Headrow/Eastgate into the bus station, in view of the amount of money which had been spent upgrading this and the number of people needing to use this facility

·  the view that the whole scheme hinged on the absence of buses down Eastgate

·  that problems currently existed with east/west routes through the city centre and that diverting buses along George Street up to The Corn Exchange would add to these problems

·  the need to consult on the proposals with all the bus operators, not solely First Bus

·  the need to ensure the system of bus routes worked with the delivery systems for market traders

·  that there should be no additional pedestrian guard rails on George Street

·  the design of the car park and the need to ensure this appeared as a building rather than a box

·  that consideration should be given to reflecting the interesting and intricate designs of the paving in Leeds’ historic arcades in the proposed new arcade

·  the need to ensure the height of the bridge would protect views both to and from Eastgate

·  that increased trade for Kirkgate Market was possible and had occurred in Leicester when the Highcross development had opened adjacent to the city’s market, however, it was essential that logistically the market could continue to function properly and therefore some tweaking of the scheme might be needed to achieve this

·  that despite the boost to the market trade in Leicester, that the impression had been given on the site visit to Highcross that many people only visited the John Lewis store by car and then returned home thereby confining their use of the centre and their spending to the anchor store, and that despite the obvious draw of John Lewis in Leeds, this would need to be considered

·  that details of the design of the John Lewis store were awaited but concerns that the store in Highcross lacked active frontages around the whole of the building and that this should not be replicated on the Leeds store

·  that walkways were a feature of Leeds city centre and that the proposals for the area around the John Lewis store lacked these

Officers provided the following responses:

·  regarding the bus proposals, that Metro had taken the lead on satisfying themselves that the proposals would work and that all bus operators providing services into Leeds were being spoken to.  It was estimated that approximately 76 buses per hour were to be diverted along George Street although traffic modelling remained ongoing. 

·  that the implications of diverting buses up Albion Street on to Merrion Street would need to be considered

·  that no additional need for pedestrian guard rails had been identified for this scheme

·  that in relation to the design of the John Lewis store, debate had centered around issues such as servicing, floor plates and door openings, therefore for the purposes of the presentation, Officers had used a previous representation of the store.  If the outline application was approved, it was possible that the first Reserved Matters application should be how the John Lewis store related to the rest of the scheme

In response to the specific questions raised in the report, the Panel

provided the following comments:

·  Members were supportive of the principle of the proposed uses and their mix

·  that subject to the comments made, Members were supportive of the principles of the proposed layout, scale and design

·  regarding the principles of the proposed transport strategy, access arrangements and connectivity across and through the site, some scepticism was expressed about the information which had been provided and that the proposed Vicar Lane/George Street diversion would work adequately.  Further information was requested on details of all buses which used Eastgate – in both directions – and not solely those using Central Bus Station, which should also encompass all the bus operators and provide information on the consequences of the proposals for bus users.  The Panel’s Highways Officer suggested the information could be provided in the form used to brief Members of the proposed bus changes associated with the Trinity Scheme.  This was accepted, with the information being requested as soon as it was available

·  concerning the proposed public realm and landscaping, Members broadly supported this, although the need for the proposed water feature to work consistently was stressed.  In terms of the use of Eastgate Square there was a difference in views on the type of event which should be provided, but it was agreed it should be a well-used space.  Some concern was expressed in relation to the proposed public open space around the markets area and the need for the streets around Millgarth to be pedestrian-friendly was emphasised

·  Members were supportive of the principles of the approach taken to heritage assets conservation; demolitions and to the archaeology

·  in relation to the strategy for drainage and managing flood risk, Members were supportive of the principles proposed

·  in respect of sustainability, Members were supportive of the sustainable measures proposed.  In terms of an acceptable fall back position should the low carbon energy centre not come forward, it was suggested that a default position should be that of the most energy efficient alternative possible

·  Members supported the principles and findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment

·  in relation to the Section 106 obligations as listed in the submitted report, these were supported as was the Chief Planning Officer’s comments that provision for sufficient space for unloading vehicles during the day for market traders would be required under condition

RESOLVED –  To note the report and the comments now made

(Towards the end of this item, Councillor Nash left the meeting)