Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application for the proposed demolition of existing office building and construction of new, part 9, part 23 storey, student accommodation building at Symons House, Belgrave Street, Leeds 2

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an application for the proposed demolition of existing office building and the construction of new, part 9, part 23 storey, student accommodation building at Symons House, Belgrave Street, Leeds 2 

Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

The Planning Case Officer addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

·  The proposal is to demolish the existing building and to construct a new building with a rectangular footprint, similar to that existing. The new building would have an “L shaped” form when viewed from the south. The taller element, approximately two thirds of the length of the building, would be 23 storeys (18 at pre-application), 66.4m in height. The lower eastern shoulder would be 9 storeys (10 at pre-application) 27.6m in height, a similar height to Fairfax House.

·  Due to the changing ground levels the full extent of the lower ground floor of the building would be exposed on the southern elevation whereas fronting Belgrave Street the lower ground floor level would only be evident at the lower, eastern end of the building. The ground floor of the building fronting Belgrave Street would be set back approximately 2 metres from the building line above. The first floor soffit height would be a minimum of 3.5 metres above ground level. The lowest two levels of the buildings would be largely glazed and the upper levels faced in light-coloured brickwork.

·  The lower ground floor of the building would contain plant, bin and cycle stores, a laundry, transformer room and the lower level of a gym, part of the dedicated facilities provided for the students. The ground floor, accessed from the north-west corner of the building onto Belgrave Street, would comprise the reception area, study areas, open lounge space, a cinema room and the upper level of the gym. The dedicated space would total 748m2.

·  The upper floors of the building would contain a mix of studios; one-bedroom apartments, and 2, 4 and 5 bedroom student clusters.

Studios 185

Apartments 10

2 bedroom cluster (10)

4 bedroom cluster (16)

5 bedroom cluster (14)

Total Bed spaces 349

·  Other than for one, larger, accessible studio (44.2m2) the standard studio size would be 21.34m2. The one bedroom apartments would be 44.2m2. The 2 bedroom clusters would have 14.5m2 study bedrooms with 21m2 kitchen/living spaces; the 4 bedroom clusters would have 14.5m2 study bedrooms and 43m2 kitchen/living space; and the 5 bedroom clusters would have 14m2 study bedrooms and 31m2 kitchen/living areas. Each apartment will be fitted with bespoke bathroom and kitchen units, pre-fabricated off-site, prior to installation in the building. The apartments are designed to have distinct zones for washing / dressing, living / dining and sleep / studying.

·  A student amenity room (44.2m2) is proposed at level 8 with access from this point onto an external amenity terrace (189.5m2) located on the roof of the lower shoulder of the building. The terrace would be sheltered and secured by raised planting and a balustrade.

·  The building would be serviced from Belgrave Street making use of the existing layby across the street and from the parking court to the rear. The applicant and officers have discussed the desirability of making Belgrave Street more pedestrian friendly and to improving accessibility to the St Alban’s Place green space.

In response to Members questions, the following issues were discussed:

·  Why was the Section 106 legal agreement required to be completed within 3 months. Was this timescale normally achieved.

·  Would there be night time lighting

·  What is the relationship to nearby heritage buildings such as the Belgrave Music Hall

·  Further information was required on the impact of student accommodation in the area

·  The commuted sum of £200,000 for highway improvement works, what would it be used for

·  How would student pick up and drop off be managed

·  The building still appeared to be too chunky due to the strong horizontal lines, could these be softened. Concern was also raised about the solidity and appearance of the gable ends

·  It was suggested the outside of the building may become discoloured due to the proximity of the Inner Ring Road and weathering

The Planning Case Officer together with the applicant’s representative provided the following responses:

·  The reference to the 3 month deadline for completing Section 106 agreements allows the Chief Planning Officer to refuse planning permission without coming back to Plans Panel if there is no progress being made on the Section 106 Heads of Terms as agreed at Plans Panel. For most applications successful progress is made although in many cases its takes longer than 3 months to complete the legalities of the documentation.

·  Night time lighting would be provided and the details are to be controlled by planning condition. 

·  The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that the application before Members was in line with current adopted Council Policy. A report on the demand for student accommodation including the views of developers and Universities and the impact on residents and businesses within the city centre would be made available to Members in due course

·  The commuted sum would not fund widening of the footways but would fund the refurbishment of footways and highway improvements to create a more friendly pedestrian area. It was noted that it was not possible to totally pedestrianise Brunswick Street due to the need to provide on-street car parking spaces and access the on-street loading bays

·  There was no parking associated with this development so day to day pick up and drop off would rely on on-street parking but arrangements for the start and end of terms, in conjunction with nearby St Alban’s Place development, would be agreed with the local highway authority

·  In terms of the appearance of the building, there was a need to provide visual interest through the brick detailing of the building but it may be possible to make the horizontal grid lines less prominent in order to emphasise the vertical nature of the building and reduce its apparent “chunkiness”

·  The building construction could be detailed to avoid staining of the brickwork.

·  The gaps across Merrion Place and Merrion Street and the immediate context of more modern large scale buildings help to mitigate any unduly dominant impact on the setting of nearby heritage assets such as the Belgrave Music Hall 

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  A New Policy for Student Accommodation in the city centre was required

·  Brunswick Street should be pedestrianised and £200,000 is insufficient for this 

·  Some Members were of the view that the room size was too small and living conditions were unacceptable (Councillor Campbell and Councillor Mcniven) other Members considered the room size and amenities to be acceptable

·  Although there was some discussion about the proposed brick colour and possible introduction of another material , overall it was considered that the design of the building was acceptable

·  The suggestion to make the grid line less prominent was welcomed

In summing up the Chair thanked the Developers for their attendance commenting that the majority of Members appeared to be supportive of the proposals

(Under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.5 Councillor Campbell required it to be recorded that that he was not supportive of the proposals)

RESOLVED – That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the resolution of detailed highway improvement and wind issues and the specified conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the submitted report (and any others which he might consider appropriate) and also the completion of a Section 106 agreement to include the following obligations:

•   Use of accommodation for use solely by students in full-time higher

  education;

•   A travel plan monitoring fee of £3,765

•   Implementation of travel plan

•   Local employment and training initiatives;

•   Section 106 management fee of £750.

In the event of the Section 106 having 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.