Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application which seeks the demolition of existing building and erection of 37 storey student accommodation building, Hume House, Wade Lane, Merrion Way and Tower House Street, Leeds.

(Report attached)

With reference to the meeting of 15^th February 2018 when Members received a pre-application presentation in respect of this site.

The Chief Planning Officer now submitted a report which set out details of an application which sought the demolition of the existing building and the erection of a 37 storey student accommodation building at Hume House, Wade Lane, Merrion Way and Tower House Street, Leeds 2.

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

Planning Officers together with the applicant’s representatives addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

·  The proposal was to demolish the existing building and to construct a 37 storey building in its place. The long axis of the building would align with Wade Lane to the southeast rather than Tower House Street as the present structure. As such, the spine of the building would run south-west to north east. The slender southern elevation of the building would project approximately 11m forward of the existing building towards Merrion Way albeit the lowest two levels above ground primarily around the southern and western frontage would be set some 3m further inboard. The upper body of the building also oversails areas of the   lowest levels on the eastern elevation. At its closest point the northern elevation of the building would be 8.5m from the Arena Village tower   and the west corner 11m from Arena Point, albeit the orientation of the   building to its neighbours is such that distances markedly increase from these positions.

·  The building would have two small areas of basement. The ground floor of the student accommodation building would comprise the reception and management offices, a common room including a double-height space around the southern entrance, and other supporting facilities such as the management suite and bicycle storage. Level 1 would contain an additional common room and services including the laundrette, plant room and bin store served by its own lift. Further study rooms are proposed at Level 24 and 35. Excluding the cluster space 546m2 of internal dedicated amenity space is proposed and an external roof terrace is identified at Level 35 (204m2). The student accommodation comprises a mix of studios (22m2) and 4, 5 and 6 bedroom clusters (study cluster bedrooms would typically be 14m2). Associated kitchen / living areas would be 21-24m2 for 4 bedroom clusters; 25-27m2 for 5 bedroom clusters; and 30-35m2 for 6 bedroom clusters. In total, 96 studios and 135 clusters (656 bedrooms) are proposed, 752 bedspaces overall.

·  Active areas at the lowest two levels of the building would have double-height glazing with a cantilevered soffit height of approximately 7.5m. Above this point the building extrudes vertically to level 25 above which the component fronting Merrion Way checks back and in and terminates with a roof terrace above level 35. On the Wade Lane elevation a full height recess distinguishes the southern component from the longer northern component which continues up to level 37. The arrangement fronting Tower House Street is different as beyond the recess the central section of the building projects out 5 metres for a length of 15m before stepping back to the northern section of the building.

·  Above the double height glazed base the main body of the building would be ordered and disciplined, formed of smaller domestic elements of which it would be composed. It is intended that a high-quality off-white artificial stone with a light acid etching is used as the principal building material. Moulded panels may be introduced at the plinth level to add additional texture. Building fenestration and architectural metalwork would contrast with the cladding with a rich anodic bronze coating.

·  A new layby would be formed on the east side of Tower House Street to be used for deliveries and student drop-off at the beginning and end of years. It is intended to reduce kerb-levels and to enhance the surface to make Tower House Street more pedestrian-friendly. A new paved surface is proposed to the public realm immediately surrounding the development. Raised planters would be introduced towards the north side of the building, including new street trees, together with totem structures to assist in wind mitigation. Similar totem structures are proposed to the front, southern end, of the building as wind mitigation but also intended to serve the dual purpose of public art. A specimen tree would be planted closer to Merrion Way to replace the existing tree that would need to be removed.

·  The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement which considers the impact of the development upon daylight, sunlight and overshadowing; built heritage; townscape and visual impact; and wind microclimate. The application is also supported by an acoustic report; air quality assessment; arboricultural and tree report; archaeological assessment; a design and access statement; an ecology assessment; an energy statement; a flood risk assessment and drainage strategy; a phase I ground conditions report; a lighting impact assessment; a planning statement; a statement of community involvement; a transport statement; a travel plan; a utilities statement; and a waste management strategy.

Members raised the following questions:

·  With reference to the ground floor plan, the overhang, how far would it project out.

·  Were the living areas to all the cluster flats the same size.

·  Referring to the space at the rear of the proposed development, what was the distance to the neighbouring property (walkable space)

·  Was there an evacuation plan for residents occupying the upper floors

·  Was there a lighting scheme planned for the development

·  Were there any recycling facilities proposed

·  Members queried the species of trees to be planted in the public realm area

·  How would maintenance of the internal common areas be undertaken

·  How would access into and around the building be controlled.

·  Had a wind study been undertaken

·  It appears there would be a lot of development taking place in the immediate area at the same time, how was the Council managing

co-ordination 

·  How would the arrival of student residents be managed at the start of term time

In responding to the issues raised, the applicant’s representative and council officers said:

·  It was confirmed that the upper floors of the building would project 3 metres beyond the lower two floors.

·  Members were informed that the cluster flats would not all have the same living room size; a 4 bed cluster unit would have a 21-24sqm living area, a 5 bed cluster would have a 25-27 sqm living area, a 6 bed cluster unit would have 30-35 sqm living area.

·  Members were informed that the distance between the two properties was the width of a footpath (3.5m)

·  It was reported that work was ongoing to developed both a fire strategy and also an evacuation strategy, both of which would be signed off by Building Control.

·  It was confirmed that a full lighting scheme was currently being developed, a key feature being no dark spots

·  Members were informed that both an energy strategy and a waste strategy were being planned for the building including the possible use of recycling shoots

·  Members were informed that the types of trees to be used were detailed in paragraph 9.6.1 of the submitted report and would be in accordance with NRWLP policy Land 2.

·  It was reported that maintenance of the common areas would be carried out by the management company who would put in place a maintenance routine

·  Members were informed that all residents would be issued with a key fob to access the building and the common areas within

·  It was confirmed that a wind impact survey had been undertaken and had confirmed the site and adjacent areas would be safe for all users.

·  The Central Area Team Leader confirmed that planning conditions would require the agreement of a construction management plan for this proposal plus others in the neighbouring area. It was also understood that discussions were ongoing to use the same building contractor who was involved in a nearby development.

·  It was reported that a management plan for the arrival of residents would be developed, each student being allocated with a specific time slot for arrival.

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  Members welcomed the changes that had been made to the application following comments made at the pre application stage

·  Members expressed the view that this was now a really good scheme.

In summing up the Chair thanked all parties for their attendance and contributions suggesting Members appeared to be supportive of the application.

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

• Accommodation for use solely by students in full-time higher education;

• Travel plan review fee of £3,180;

• Implementation of travel plan;

• Contribution of £430,000 towards Merrion Way highway improvements;

• Local employment and training initiatives;

• Section 106 management fee of £1500.

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.