Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an outline application for residential development and associated basement parking at Sweet Street, Holbeck, Leeds LS11 9AA

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an outline application for residential development and associated basement parking at Sweet Street, Holbeck, Leeds 11.

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 maximum height of the building would be 10 residential storeys, approximately 33m. The maximum footprint would be U-shaped, fronting onto Sweet Street and Siddall Street and the new pedestrian/cycle route to the north, forming a west facing courtyard amenity space. The indicative building footprint would be set back approximately 10.5m from the boundary to the north, which would allow the provision of a 2.5m wide public pedestrian/cycle route and not prejudice the development of the sites to the north. There would be a residents’ gym and communal lounge at ground floor

·  The proposal is for an indicative maximum of 215 flats in outline only, likely to be provided in the following combination and size:

No. Type Mix H4 target mix Size

33 Studio (included in one-bedroom target and size below)

103 1 bed 60% Min 0-Max 50% 35.58-43.5sqm

75 2 bed 35% Min 30-Max 50% 61.9-67sqm

10 3 bed 5% Min 20-Max 70% 85-90sqm

·  A pedestrian route is proposed along the northern edge of the site, this would be a minimum of 2.5m wide and would feature tree planting. This route would be added to if neighbouring sites to the north and west were to come forward for redevelopment at any time in the future, in order to achieve the aspirations for enhanced connectivity within Holbeck from Siddall Street to Marshall Street.

·  Basement car parking for the block would be accessed from Siddall Street. This would provide 68 car parking spaces to serve the development, including 2 disabled bays and 6 electric vehicle charging points. The basement would also provide secure cycle parking for 215 cycles, 16 motorcycle spaces and bin storage.

·  A minimum of 10% energy generation would be developed through on site low carbon energy sources. The scheme would also deliver a reduction of at least 20% on building regulations carbon emissions. As this scheme is in outline only, further details will follow regarding how this might be achieved, however the applicant has indicated that this would include roof-top solar panels. The external appearance of the building would include material such as: brick, glazing, and metal cladding.

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

·  Previously Members had suggested that the development of the adjacent Council owned site be explored in conjunction with this site, had such enquiries been made. 

·  There appeared to be a number of one bedroom studio apartments which were below the required space standards

The Planning Case Officer/ applicant representatives provided the following responses:

·  It was reported that discussions had taken place with the Director of City Development who had confirmed that the LCC site was not available at the current time but that both sites could be developed independently on the basis of the current proposals.

·  It was confirmed there were likely to be 33 studio apartments which were just below the required space standards, but this detail would be fully considered at reserved matters stage.

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  The Panel would be robust in seeking adequate affordable housing provision 

·  A number of Members expressed the view that the indicative design of the building was unimaginative

·  The developers need to bring forward a “statement of quality”  which would provide a legacy for the future

·  The proposed use of red brick was dull and uninspiring

·  In was suggested that inspiration be taken from the proposals planned for the South Bank

·  Explore southern aspect for amenity space, space is required which is usable. 

·  The C Plan form does not appear to provide the quality of space required.

·  The area needs to have a sustainable population, more larger family apartments are required 

·  There was concern that some of the studio apartments were below the required space standards

In summing up the Chair said although this was an outline application there was concern from a number of Members about the shape/ design and footprint of the development.

RESOLVED – That the application be deferred for further discussions around the shape/ design and footprint of the development