Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer which provides a position statement on an application for the change of use from car park to public realm and amenity space, to include paving, water feature, drainage, exterior lighting and associated soft landscaping works to land off Sovereign Street, Leeds 1

(Report attached)

  Further to minute 14 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 5^th July 2012 where Panel received a pre-application presentation on proposals for the creation of a new green space in the city centre, Members considered a position statement on the proposals.  Plans and graphics were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  Officers presented the report and stated that the intention was for most of the site to be delivered alongside the construction of the new KPMG building, although some temporary landscaping might be necessary to building plots B and C where proposals were not at an advanced stage

  Members were informed that it was hoped that the development of the public amenity space and the adjoining building plots would act as a catalyst for better utilisation of the Dark Arches

  The Panel discussed the proposals and commented on the following matters:

• the design of the scheme; that it contained raised areas with concerns that this was not child-friendly and also created areas where rubbish could accumulate
• the emphasis on Yorkstone for the seating; the need to consider other materials, possibly timber and to include actual seating in the scheme, rather than the raised areas which were proposed, with consideration being given to including alcoves, to allow for greater use of the space, i.e. through outdoor meetings
• disappointment that the views expressed by Members at the meeting in August had not seemed to have been taken into account and that the opportunity to design an all-encompassing inviting public space had not been taken
• the retention of raised beds in the scheme when Members had indicated they did not wish these to be included and the difficulty in properly maintaining raised grassed areas
• the success of Park Square, particularly in the summer and the need to consider the elements of that scheme which led to its popularity, when considering the design of this space
• that the site seemed smaller than when the proposal was first muted; that there was too much paving; the buildings encroached on the greenspace; that what was being proposed was not good enough and did not complement the quality of the proposed KPMG building
• that improved planting needed to be provided; that more grass should be included in the overall scheme and thought should be given to structural planting, e.g. grouped box balls and pleached hornbeams
• the importance of the water feature in the overall scheme; the need for it to be properly maintained and some concerns about safety, especially for young children and people walking through the area late at night
• that the new urban greenspace had to live up to the Council’s ambitions for it and that the proposals as presented did not do that
• the Council’s commitment to creating a child-friendly city and the feeling that this space fell short of that
• the possibility of reorienting plot C and the creation of temporary landscaping on plots B and C, with mixed views on the effectiveness of these suggestions and concerns that any temporary scheme which was created could be in place for some time, depending on how soon the other building plots came forward for development
• the area of planting around plot C which was considered unnecessary and that a large, single area was more effective

The Chief Planning Officer provided the following comments:

• that the greenspace area was smaller than that shown on the plan included in the Planning Statement, however, that had been a schematic plan only and that the current position was that efforts were being made to attract developers and that some flexibility was needed.  Members were also informed that a prospective scheme for plot C would be considered by Executive Board at its November meeting
• that providing good quality greenspace helped when marketing sites and that interim schemes were not cost effective.  Whilst it was important to secure the right balance between hard and soft landscaping in this scheme, it was felt appropriate that it was delivered upfront

In addressing the specific issues raised in the report for Members’

comments, the following responses were provided:

• that the intended uses of the different character areas were supported subject to reconsideration of the balance between hard and soft landscaping and the proposed palette of materials and tree species which were appropriate and that consideration should be given to the provision of benches and the use of a wider palette of materials.  In terms of uses, Sovereign Square should have a sense of repose; be child-friendly and include an active water feature
• that the temporary uses of plots B and C were supported although further consideration should be given to the proposed tree species and planting details to ensure they were appropriate and not litter traps
• to note Members’ comments about the comprehensive approach to tree replacement within the proposed greenspace planting design be noted, particularly the comments relating to suitable architectural species for the site
• that whilst the proposals sought to enable all users to pass through the scheme proposal via all main pedestrian connections and be able to use all the aspects of the space, concerns existed about the use of raised areas, particularly safety issues for young children and that disabled access had to be considered fully
• that the proposals should include works to enhance Pitt Row

RESOLVED -  To note the report and the comments now made