Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer which provides a position statement on an application to erect a four storey office development with basement car parking and landscaping to land off Sovereign Street, Leeds 1

(Report attached)

  Plans, graphics and sample materials were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had been undertaken earlier in the day

  Officers presented a position statement for a four storey office development with basement car parking and landscaping on land off Sovereign Street and Pitt Row LS1, identified as site A, in the Sovereign Street Development Site Framework

  Members were informed that the development was for the new Leeds Headquarters of KPMG, which if approved, would see the company relocating from their existing premises on Neville Street.  The Chief Planning Officer stressed the importance to the commercial health of the city of KPMG’s decision to remain in Leeds

  The building would be predominantly glazed with elevations to Sovereign Street, Pitt Row and the proposed new public greenspace -  Sovereign Square -.  The main pedestrian access would be from Sovereign Street, with servicing off Pitt Row.  As the site was within flood risk zone 2, the entrance floor level would be raised by 1 metre

  A BREEAM Excellent rating was being sought for the building which would see the use of air source heat pumps and the provision of a sedum roof.  In addition, solar shading would be provided through the inclusion of brise soleil and angled facades

  Members were informed that in developing the site, it would be necessary to remove the 13 semi-mature Norway Maple trees and 1 Cherry Tree as whilst they were currently in good condition, their long-term future was poor as the compacted hardstanding around the trees had damaged their roots

  Members discussed the proposals and commented on the following matters:

• the funding for the bridge over the River Aire and concerns that this development did not make a contribution towards it
• the possibility of saving some of the existing trees on the site
• whether glare from the building would be controlled and the possibility of light pollution from the building
• that KPMG’s decision to remain in Leeds was welcomed and that it showed there was confidence in the city
• the importance of the roof top plant not detracting from the overall appearance of the building and the need for detailed information to be provided on this element as the roof of the building would be seen by occupiers of adjacent premises
• the importance of siting the correct species of trees to suit their location, with the possibility of willow trees being considered for the site if the water table was high enough
• that the building was well designed but the greenspace was problematic and that although they were two individual applications, it was difficult to separate them

Officers provided the following responses

• that Executive Board had committed the contributions from the development of site A to the adjacent greenspace and that work was being undertaken on an alternative funding mechanism for the city park and the bridge
• regarding retention of the trees, there was the possibility of some replanting on Pitt Row but realistically due to the damage sustained to the tree roots, it was more likely that replacement planting would be necessary
• that moving towards determination of the application, further technical information would be obtained regarding glare, however Members were advised that the fins on the elevations would not be illuminated and there would be no uplighting from the building
• that further information on the design of the plant room would be sought

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

provided the following responses:

• Members welcomed the principle of locating a blue chip headquarters office building in this sustainable location, on a vacant, cleared site in need of regeneration
• that the footprint and massing were appropriate in the context of nearby buildings and the guidance in the Sovereign Street Planning Statement 2011
• that in respect of the proposed roof-top plant treatment, that further details were needed and that it should be taken into account that due to the height of some of the surrounding buildings, the roof of the building would be visible from some locations
• that the principle of the proposed detailed building design would be acceptable, subject to conditions requiring on-site samples, external cladding and building feature (e.g. fins and brise soleil) samples and detailed typical working drawings at construction phase
• in respect of areas of full height privacy manifestation proposed to parts of the Sovereign Street and Pitt Row elevations, further details of this was provided.  Members were informed that KPMG wished to screen some of the back office functions, i.e. the post room and staff canteen but also wished for issues of commercial confidentiality, to screen the conference rooms and meeting rooms.  Whilst the screening of back office functions would be towards Pitt Row which was a less sensitive location, the conference and meeting rooms would be on Sovereign Street, with concerns at the impact of this on the corner of the building.  Members discussed this and were of the view that whilst there was a need to ensure appropriate security there were options available which would not necessitate blocking out a key part of the building to the detriment of its visual appearance.  On this matter the Chief Planning Officer stated that it was right that this issue be looked at carefully but that in many buildings, the solution to this was a solid wall, therefore what was being proposed was better than most buildings, however the possibility to refine this would be explored
• regarding the street and landscape planting around the proposal, that further information on this would be provided; the possibility of replanting some of the existing trees could be explored and to note that Councillor Nash wished to be involved in the selection of tree species for the site
• in respect of greenspace contributions, to note the comments made and that the development should make a financial contribution in lieu of on-site landscaping and tree provision
• that Members were happy with the general approach to highways and transportation matters in relation to the site
• in respect of sustainability measures in the proposed building design, that further information, particularly around glare, be provided

RESOLVED -  To note the report and the comments now made