Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning officer which sets out details of a pre-application presentation for an outline proposal “The Tannery” - mixed use scheme comprising build to rent (BTR) residential with ancillary ground floor mixed uses including small scale retailing, café/restaurants, bars and crèche on the former Arla foods site on the southern side of Kirkstall Road and fronting the River Aire.

(Report attached)

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

pre-application proposal for an outline proposal “The Tannery” – mixed use scheme comprising build to rent (BtR) residential with ancillary ground floor mixed uses including small scale retailing, café/restaurant bars and crèche on the former Arla food site on the southern side of Kirkstall Road and fronting the River Aire.

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

·  Large scale redevelopment of a brown-field site

·  Kirkstall Road is located to the north of the site, the River Aire and towpath of the Leeds Liverpool Canal are positioned to the south

·  The proposal, build to rent residential development, six blocks on a site which is L-shaped, 7 to 16 storey’s in height delivering 640 residential units

·  Surface level car parking (230 spaces) cycle parking to be determined

·  Supporting commercial uses on ground floor

·  Single point of vehicular access/egress would be provided on Kirkstall Road with an exit only on Washington Street

·  Public realm, public open space, landscaping and greenspace proposals

·  Pedestrian access/ service arrangements

·  Affordable housing 7% (Compliant with Core Strategy Policy H5)

·  Energy/ Sustainability Strategy to be provided

·  Full wind assessment to be undertaken

·  Flood risk assessment to be provided

Members raised the following questions:

·  There appeared to be a significant amount of visible car parking, could some of this be hidden

·  Does the car parking provision reflect a city centre location

·  Would flood alleviation measures be included within the development

·  The overall alignment and design of the buildings appears to be “too boxy” and perpendicular to each other, could this be re-visited

·  The illustrations provided did not provide a true representation of the development, with better quality images being needed before Members could necessarily be expected to give a clear ‘steer’ regarding design

·  Had balconies been considered

·  How was it intended that the public realm space proposed would be ‘activated’

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

·  The architect stated that the car parking was located in undercroft areas or enclosed by buildings to limit street views as far as possible. He suggested the car parking could be further clustered to free up other areas and more green infrastructure could screen the car parking areas

·  The City Centre Team Leader reported that the car parking provision for this development was 37% similar to some other fringe city centre developments where less than the allowable maximum parking levels had been approved, however, it was understood the developers were encouraging less car travel and parking areas would revert back to landscaping if not used at a later date once occupation of the development increased and the extent of active use of car parking facilities had been gauged.

·  Members were informed that the proposal would be constructed in line with the requirements and limitations of the FAS2 scheme and would also include a wall 600mm in height, which would be incorporated within the landscaped area.  As with other city centre development sites that are within the flood risk zone, this would be developed with the appropriate mitigation measures incorporated as identified through subsequent analysis and evolution of the proposal

·  The architect suggested that the proposed arrangement of the buildings presented an opportunity to create large areas of open space and clear pedestrian connections through the site

·  The LCC Design Officer suggested the detailed building design was still to be established and Members need to see how the architecture evolves, with the images currently shown being at an early stage and therefore indicative only

·   The architect said that balconies were not included within the design brief

·  Consideration could be given to development of a riverside park-style element within the development redline

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  The majority of Members welcomed the proposals

·  Could significant landscaping/ greenspace provision be incorporated along the Kirkstall Road frontage to mitigate against traffic pollution and provide a buffer to the residential blocks

·  There needs to be significant greenspace and permeability throughout the site

·  Consider the use of photovoltaic cells and/or green infrastructure to screen surface level parking

·  Strong sustainable design and construction measures need to be included in the development, with this site presenting the opportunity for something very innovative to be brought forward

·  There appeared to be too much hard surfacing and the use of grasscrete should be considered for the surface parking areas 

·  More internal communal space was required to encourage people to socialise

·  The width of the riverside walkway should be widened at the pinch points

In offering comments on the officer’s questions in the submitted report:

·  Members were generally supportive of the proposed uses for the site

·  Members were supportive of the emerging scale but further refinement and information on the details of the design was required, with a less formulaic design to be considered

·  Members were supportive of the emerging approach to public realm but further landscaping/ greenspace provision was suggested and particularly along the Kirkstall Road frontage

·  Members were supportive of the connectivity proposals but could further consideration be given to extending the width of the riverside walkway at the pinch points and ensuring greater connectivity to the riverside and east-west

·  Further consideration was required around the approach to car parking provision on site including the level of parking that is required in this sustainable location

·  Consider innovative and attractive flood alleviation measures

·  Members expressed an aspiration for the provision of a river bus/water taxi

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.