Agenda item

PREAPP/18/00245 - Pre-application presentation for the demolition of the existing building and creation of residential development ("Springwell Gardens II") with 288 apartments and a commercial unit. This is a second phase to the adjacent 'Radius' ("Springwell Gardens I") development (16/05198/FU) at Cartwright House, Springwell Road, Holbeck, Leeds, LS12 1EX

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of a pre-application presentation for the demolition of the existing building and creation of residential development (“Springwell Gardens II”) with 288 apartments and a commercial unit. This is a second phase to the adjacent ‘Radius’ (“Springwell Gardens I”) development (16/05198/FU) at Cartwright House, Springwell Road, Holbeck, Leeds, LS12 1EX

 

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of a

Pre Application proposal for the demolition of the existing building and creation of residential development (“Springwell Gardens II”) with 288 apartments and a commercial unit. This was the second phase to adjacent Radius (“Springwell Gardens I”) development (16/05198/FU) at Cartwright House, Springwell Road, Holbeck, Leeds, LS12 1EX

 

Members visited the site prior to the meeting. Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

 

The applicant’s representatives addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

 

·  Site / location / context

·  The site lies within the Holbeck Neighbourhood Plan and within the South Bank Regeneration Area

·  The proposal is to construct a 24 storey residential building, containing 288 apartments: 72 one bed suits, 80 one bed apartments, 122 two bed apartments and 14 three bed apartments

·  All apartments would meet Nationally Described Space Standards

·  Active frontage onto Springwell Road

·  Secure cycle storage

·  Parking for 24 cars

·  11 motorcycle parking spaces

·  Communal terrace at first floor level linking in with Phase I

·  Rooftop landscaping

·  Large balconies

·  Affordable Housing 7%, preferred option to provide off-site (Policy H5)

·  Key views

 

Members raised the following questions:

 

·  Would a noise survey be undertaken

·  Would all the apartments have a balcony

·  Would Affordable Housing provision be provided

·  Would any wind studies be undertaken

·  Was overlooking of the balconies an issue

·  How would the greenery be maintained, especially that incorporated as part of the ‘hanging’ design on the building’s façade 

 

In responding to the issues raised, the applicant’s representatives said:

 

·  The Applicant confirmed that a full noise assessment would be undertaken.  In addition, there was the intention to incorporate high performance glazing and a number of other measures within the design to assist with noise mitigation and ensuring appropriate ventilation.

·  Discussions are underway with neighbouring landowners (including Network Rail) and these would continue as the applicant works towards an application submission. However, this is a City Centre scheme and there will inevitably be activities that are associated with a City Centre location that generate some noise impact. 

·  Members were informed that all apartments would have a balcony

·  The Affordable Housing contribution would be delivered at 7%, on-site provision had been considered and it was hoped that this site would be attractive for registered providers, such that it may be possible to have on-site delivery

·  Members were informed that a full wind assessment would be undertaken and submitted.  The development of Springwell Gardens I had already provided some protection for the application site from prevailing winds, but further mitigation measures would be considered as necessary.

·  The Planning Officer confirmed that some overlooking could take place but due to the good separation  distance of 25-35 metres, and given that both phases were part of one overall scheme within a high density City landscape, the proposals were seen to be acceptable.

·  The maintenance of the greenery was an important factor and further consideration was required, but keeping it adequately maintained would be a priority – particularly given that the greenery on the façade was such a key feature of the design proposal.

 

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

 

·  All Members were supportive of the emerging scheme commenting that it was an imaginative, high quality proposal

·  Members welcomed the greenery and the inclusion of 3 bedroom flats within the City Centre

·  Could a condition be added to address the maintenance of the ‘hanging’ greenery on the building’s façade and that a robust approach for this was secured going forward

·  Could more details be provided about the residential amenity, particularly relating to noise impact and adequate ventilation

·  Could sample materials be provided, the colour of the materials should better reflect phase 1

 

In drawing the discussion to a conclusion Members provided the following feedback:

 

·  Members were supportive with the principle of developing this site for combined residential and commercial use

·  Further information was required in respect of the residential use of the building proposed as positioned and designed relative to the adjacent railway sidings

·  Members were of the opinion that the tower block proposed would be acceptable in view of wider street scape views, taking account of both the existing and any “future” context (as per already consented schemes)

·  The external design of the proposed blocks was considered to be acceptable subject to addressing the comments about materials

·  Members were supportive in principle of the emerging designs in respect of the greenery attached to the building

·  Members considered the level of car parking to be acceptable in this immediate locality

·  In respect of the Council’s declaration of the Climate Emergency and the detailed design/ carbon impact, Members expressed the view that the proposals were promising but more details and a commitment to further provisions were required

 

The Chair thanked the developers for their attendance and presentation suggesting that Members appeared to be generally supportive of the development.

 

RESOLVED –

 

(i)  To note the details contained in the pre-application presentation

 

(ii)  That the developers be thanked for their attendance and presentation

 


Supporting documents: