The island development itself is not something I'm impressed with, but the density of the blocks planned for the Kirkstall Road side of the river is welcome. I don't think that element is part of this application though?
I echo the above that there's too much green space. We all want more green space in general, but consolidated into parks, squares and high quality recreational areas. When it separates one building from the next so widely, you end up with no sense of place. We need streets, not blocks floating lost in a sea of green. I worry this will be like Seacroft in 30 years time.
I think it looks pretty good. If I had one comment about the overall design approach though, it would be that I'd probably prefer bulkier/larger/taller blocks closer together to give more space for one larger park.
I can see the 60s comment if you consider the way tower blocks were placed on council estates with the idea that every block needs its own open space around it. For the most part, these spaces are dead zones and not widely used for relaxation/leisure. Are we expecting the shadowy open spaces between each block to be any different?
The problem with the IRR here is that it's pretty much the best way to get across the city at the moment. There's no decent Outer Ring Road and the other side of the IRR is at-grade with many traffic lights. No extensive mass transit seems to be coming any time soon and so would it be particularly wise to downgrade one of the better pieces of transport infrastructure in the city with no alternative?
A forum community dedicated to skyscrapers, towers, highrises, construction, and city planning enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about structures, styles, reviews, scale, transportation, skylines, architecture, and more!