Leeds Met Uni - City Campus - redevelopment

[Gherkin]

No, nobody here should represent all of us. We are individual people with different opinions and should all be heard separately. The more of us complaining the better to be honest.

[LeedsLad]

Not sure a planning objection can be that something isn't tall enough?... Perhaps could argue it looks poor, given the large footprint combined with lack of height, or some words to that effect?

I'd be more along the lines of would like to see something more arcitecturely pleasing, being as daring as the recent Broadcasting Tower...

[FreddyFresher]

Originally Posted by LeedsLad

Not sure a planning objection can be that something isn't tall enough?... Perhaps could argue it looks poor, given the large footprint combined with lack of height, or some words to that effect?

I'd be more along the lines of would like to see something more arcitecturely pleasing, being as daring as the recent Broadcasting Tower...

If you were to post as one, you would have to include your real names for reasons of transparency. If anonymous, you could in theory have a vested interest. I'm sure several individual objections would be more effective.

On the design, just complain about the proportions and massing. The design looks ridiculous, its like a wall. Making the footprint smaller and its height greater could solve this.

[Aaronj09]

I have already put an 'objection' on this project. I don't mind it really, but we certainly have enough poor quality grey-black-white cheap tacky crap cladding in Leeds

As LeedsLad said, I also mentioned BT

[spacemansam]

Having the smaller footprint would increase the green area surrounding it. This could be a nice mixture of green space and contemporary architecture. A taller more slender tower with glass/ reflective cladding to match the reflectiveness of the Leeds met uni sandstone colour building and reflecting all that surrounding green space. It would also go well with the refurbed concrete blocks. A good combination in my eyes

[Gherkin]

I've formally made my objection to it.

[Lad 2011]

Originally Posted by Gherkin

I've formally made my objection to it.

Good i hope it puts a spanner in the works

[LoveTheCity]

At what email address would one use to formally object to this proposal? ;-)

[Aaronj09]

Click here

Register first though obviously

[this_city]

Originally Posted by Aaronj09

Click here

Register first though obviously

I decided to join this party

[Lad 2011]

Good, the more against it the better.

So far Gherkin, Aaronj09 & This city have sent an objection against it, did anyone else?

[Shiny_Dave]

Notes from the August City Centre panel on the pre-app from Downing:

Members seemed more bothered about the tree's than building itself. Also, are the two parts I've highlighted in bold completely contradictory?

Pre-Application Presentation - Pre-App 11/00400 -Proposed Student Accommodation at Leeds Met City Campus, Calverley Street and Woodhouse Lane, Leeds pdf icon PDF 278 KB

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer and receive a pre-application presentation on proposals for proposed student accommodation on land at Calverley Street and Woodhouse Lane, Leeds.

This is a pre-application presentation and no decision on the development will be taken, however it is an opportunity for Panel Members to ask questions, raise issues, seek clarification and comment on the proposals at this stage. There is no opportunity for public speaking about the proposals outlined in the presentation”.

Minutes:

The Panel received a pre-application presentation on proposals for new student accommodation on land at Calverley Street and Woodhouse Lane, Leeds. The presentation afforded Members the opportunity to ask questions, raise issues, seek clarification and comment on the proposals at this stage in the application process, although no decisions were made.

Mr T Skipper and Mr D Dyson addressed the Panel on behalf of the developer. Site plans, floor plans, computer generated 3D graphics and slides showing the elevational details and levels were displayed at the meeting

The following points were highlighted during the presentation:

- The site was surrounded by sensitive buildings

- The permeability of and access to this site were key considerations which informed the appearance of the development

- Phase 1 of the development included new links from Calverley Street to Woodhouse Lane and a new pedestrian route to the site boundary. This second phase would provide a further route from the University’s Rose Bowl building, through the Phase II site and on to the University itself

- The new building was deigned to be a signature building to create another edge to the new public square included in Phase I. A terraced area was proposed to enhance the public realm, off-set from the central public square

- The site was located within that part of the city centre designated the “tall buildings” zone. Slides showing the 21 storey proposal in-situ were displayed which showed relative heights in the area and the impact of the block on key city views

- Phase II would provide active frontages through the inclusion of a student drop-in centre to Woodhouse Lane and cafes/kiosks to Calverley street at ground level

- The floor plan for subsequent levels was displayed showing the student facilities available including 1 DDA compliant room per floor and communal areas.

- Modern materials would support the linear and simple form of the block


Members noted the contents of the presentation and discussed the following points:

The proximity of the new build to the Inner Ring Road and suitable noise mitigation measures such as improved landscaping
The feeling that the terraced area would not be fully utilised and the preference for improved landscaping to that area instead
Concern that those mature trees which are scheduled for removal should be replaced with a variety of trees which will be beneficial to the whole site.
Similarly Members were keen to see a substantial compensatory landscaping scheme

RESOLVED –

a) To thank the developer for the presentation

b) That the contents of the presentation and the comments made by Members be noted

link to full minutes here

[Talisker]

The two refurbished buildings are now clear of scaffolding, giving a better idea of how things will look. Some foundation works going on behind, although it appears to be associated with the existing buildings rather than having anything to do with the new 21 storey tower.

[this_city]

Originally Posted by Talisker

Some foundation works going on behind, although it appears to be associated with the existing buildings rather than having anything to do with the new 21 storey tower.

Yeah, seem to be tidying up the remnants of the old low rise block that they knocked down to turn into a plaza. Took some pics yesterday, will post shortly

[this_city]

Right, some pics from 20/02/2012

image hosted on flickr

Photo Stream-207 by 3chordboy, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Photo Stream-206 by 3chordboy, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Photo Stream-208 by 3chordboy, on Flickr

[Val Verde]

Looks good to me although I wonder how long it will take for that concrete to decay to that dull appearance it had previously?

[Lad 2011]

Porbably 30 years but who cares :P

[Immunda Leodis]

Big improvement!!!

[Rob]

Some good photos there (Talisker's city scape photo is particularly pleasing). I have to say they really have polished up well and are a huge improvement. They certainly look better than a lot of new builds.

[tigerman]

I am not so sure they look so good up close - but they look OK in these pics.