Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of a Pre - Application Presentation for the redevelopment of an existing surface car park to provide 359 residential units in stepped blocks, with associated access, landscaping and parking provision at a site on Land Off Water Lane, Holbeck, Leeds.

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report for a pre application for a redevelopment of an existing surface car park to provide 359 residential units in stepped blocks, with associated access, landscaping and parking provision at a site on Land Off Water Lane, Holbeck, Leeds.

Members had visited the site earlier in the day, photographs and slides were shown throughout the presentation.

The following attended the meeting to present the application on behalf of McLaren Living and to answer Members questions:

·  Matt Biddle – McLaren Group

·  Tim Tolcher – Architect

·  Andrew Windress – ID Planning

·  Joe Raper – Senior Heritage Planner ID Planning

The Plans Panel were informed of the following:

·  The proposals seek to create a multi-level development of residential apartments, of 9 to 26 storeys including ground floor, set within a landscaped area, with undercroft car parking and a smaller area of surface parking.

·  The scheme proposed would be for 359 apartments comprising of the following:

o  5% - 1 bedroomed 1 person apartments

o  50% - 1 bedroomed 2 person apartments

o  40% - 2 bedroomed apartments

o  5% - 3 bedroomed apartments

·  The proposal would also include internal communal amenity spaces and external landscaped communal spaces. Part of the external area would be a raised podium to the centre of the site, alongside roof terraced areas and ground floor surface landscaping.

·  The scheme proposes 55 car parking spaces in an undercroft parking area and 300 secure cycle parking spaces.

·  One of the key benefits of the site would be to link from Bath Road through Midland Mills into Water Lane subject to agreement with the adjacent landowner.

·  Appearance would draw on the mill buildings with matched brickwork with strong expressed frames to facades, arranged vertically. Large glazed windows in a mill/warehouse style, would be recessed within a strong grid with deep reveals. It was proposed to have balconies on some of the 2 and 3 bedroomed units.

·  It was noted that the developers would have a conversation with the developers of Midland Mills to seek consent to remove the wall in front of Midland Mills to open up the site.

Member’s discussions included:

·  Scope for play areas for young families.

·  A wish to see the development fully compliant with housing mix.

·  More private balconies including internal balconies.

·  Parking provision for scope to include visitor parking.

·  Difference between 1 bedroomed 1 person apartments and 1 bedroomed 2 person apartments. It was noted that there was a difference in square meterage and this formed part of the nationally prescribed space standards. Members did raise concerns that there would be no way to prevent 2 people living in inadequate space of a 1 bedroomed 1 person apartment.  The Legal Adviser clarified that our Core Strategy Space Standards took precedence over national space standards.

·  Members were of the view that the slides shown were below the usual standard and perhaps had not provided the most inspiring development. It was the view that the entrance was uninspiring and needed to show quality landscaping. It was acknowledged that work was still ongoing to develop the landscaping and there was still a conversation to be had with the developers of Midland Mills to join the spaces.

·  Members questioned the basic research into the proposed housing mix and if this had differentiated between a family living in the 3 bedroomed units as opposed to 3 people sharing the 3 bedroomed units. The developers were agreeable to sharing information on the research undertaken. It was noted that the affordable units would be located within the development.

Members were asked to provide comments to the following questions as set out in the submitted report:

8.2 – Do Members have any comments on the proposed housing mix?

·  Members wanted the development to be policy compliant.

·  Would welcome information on the research undertaken.

·  Clarification was required in relation to 1 bedroomed 1 person apartments and 1 bedroomed 2 person apartments.

·  Clarification on demand for 3 bedroomed units in the area.

8.3 – Do Members support the emerging design of the development?

·  Developers were requested to note the comments provided by Members during their discussions on landscaping.

·  Members were of the view that they were unable to comment on the detailed design of the buildings as they had not seen detailed graphics to be able to comment on. However, there was support for the emerging mass and scale across the site with the lower buildings towards the Water Lane frontage and the taller element towards Bath Road.

·  Members wished to see provision of more balconies.

8.4 – Do Members support the approach to car parking provision in this location?

·  Members were concerned that parking in this location was already problematic. Members were of the view that parking should be made available for taxi’s, visitors and deliveries.

In summing up the Area Planning Manager said that all comments had been noted with the following highlighted:

·  Housing Mix – Need to maximise in line with adopted policy, provide clarification in relation to the space standards and information on research for housing demand in the area.

·  The massing and scale generally seem to be agreeable.

·  The approach to less parking for residents was noted but Members wanted provision of sufficient space for visitors and deliveries.

·  Provision of more balconies.

·  Provision of quality green space.