SkyscraperCity Forum banner
201 - 220 of 235 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
Paris approach with the Boulevard Périphérique (its ring road basically), demonstrates what can be done with some creative thinking. They've built a tunnel and put a lake on top in one section. That's obviously never going to happen in Leeds, but busy roads don't need to be barriers. or you drop everything to the street level and have a road like the Avenues in New York.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,132 Posts
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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
698 Posts
1979745
I agree it's funny how a railway viaduct for example would be seen as positive but a road is a no no. I think a four lane at grade road would be awful. Here's a photo of hatch in Manchester it shows how you can weave a functioning elevated road into the city. I do wonder if electric cars will make elevated highways more attractive due to reduced noise and air pollution.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
7,307 Posts
Here are some new images of the revised City Reach scheme.

It looks to be a massive and comprehensive plan which would totally transform this now rather run down A65 approach into Leeds (also with the adjacent Tannery proposal). Very ambitious, but as usual it is a case of will it actually happen?

Full 2 Sep 2021 presentation slides here -
https://democracy.leeds.gov.uk/documents/b27513/City Plans Panel - 2nd September 2021 - Presentation Slides 02nd-Sep-2021 13.30 City Plans Panel.pdf?T=9

1991019

Overall scheme, with complete Otter Island development in the foreground

1991020


1991021


1991022

Proposed view from Kirkstall Road
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
I'm really interested to see how this turns out, but my gut instinct is there is still too much wasted space, moving two/three of the buildings or making others higher, could have created a fantastic pocket park right by the water.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,537 Posts

"Panel members broadly welcomed the proposals, and particularly praised the amount of land allocated for green space.

But councillors Caroline Gruen and Elizabeth Nash said they would like to see some more variety in the design of the buildings. Cllr Nash said the uniformity of the accommodation as it is currently planned reminded her of Soviet era apartment blocks."


:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
902 Posts
I've asked this before but how does one influence a council plans panel?
How do the powers that be determine what makes the panel fit for purpose? Or not as the case may be? I don't think it is an exaggeration to suggest there are people on ours, who present a real risk of throttling the growth of this city.

Back to the scheme, I'm struggling to see how you could fail to like this!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,395 Posts

"Panel members broadly welcomed the proposals, and particularly praised the amount of land allocated for green space.

But councillors Caroline Gruen and Elizabeth Nash said they would like to see some more variety in the design of the buildings. Cllr Nash said the uniformity of the accommodation as it is currently planned reminded her of Soviet era apartment blocks."


:rolleyes:
I’ve never really understood why they seem to have so much authority, though I know they can only really reject something with good reason. Comparing the plans to Soviet blocks is just opinion though, I personally like the uniformity though I like Soviet blocks. But I’d this really grounds to reject a proposal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,537 Posts
I’ve never really understood why they seem to have so much authority, though I know they can only really reject something with good reason. Comparing the plans to Soviet blocks is just opinion though, I personally like the uniformity though I like Soviet blocks. But I’d this really grounds to reject a proposal?
They can, if they so choose, refuse an application for completely unacceptable reasons. There have been several examples in the past year or so (outside Leeds) of developers winning appeals and full costs for applications which were refused by committees for purely political reasons not related to planning or due to dubious 'design' issues.

Planning officers obviously strongly advise them how they should look at applications but you will notice on a lot of these Panel meetings that councillors make rash comments like 'officers shouldn't be telling us what to do or how to vote', and I sometimes think they like disagreeing with them for the sake of feeling powerful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,836 Posts
They can, if they so choose, refuse an application for completely unacceptable reasons. There have been several examples in the past year or so (outside Leeds) of developers winning appeals and full costs for applications which were refused by committees for purely political reasons not related to planning or due to dubious 'design' issues.

Planning officers obviously strongly advise them how they should look at applications but you will notice on a lot of these Panel meetings that councillors make rash comments like 'officers shouldn't be telling us what to do or how to vote', and I sometimes think they like disagreeing with them for the sake of feeling powerful.
Ttebroc, did the developers of the former Neighbour BTR scheme you were involved appeal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,802 Posts

"Panel members broadly welcomed the proposals, and particularly praised the amount of land allocated for green space.

But councillors Caroline Gruen and Elizabeth Nash said they would like to see some more variety in the design of the buildings. Cllr Nash said the uniformity of the accommodation as it is currently planned reminded her of Soviet era apartment blocks."


:rolleyes:
Surely they're supposed to give constructive criticism? Comments like this are just rude.

I think it's really disrespectful to the architects who will have put a lot of time and effort into this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,045 Posts
Surely they're supposed to give constructive criticism? Comments like this are just rude.

I think it's really disrespectful to the architects who will have put a lot of time and effort into this.
I quite agree with you and would add that it’s also bloody rude and disrespectful not to have read the papers that were sent out before the meeting. The few times I’ve watched panel meetings, everyone’s time was wasted by members asking questions they would have know the answers to if they’d bothered to prepare properly for the meeting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
902 Posts
I quite agree with you and would add that it’s also bloody rude and disrespectful not to have read the papers that were sent out before the meeting. The few times I’ve watched panel meetings, everyone’s time was wasted by members asking questions they would have know the answers to if they’d bothered to prepare properly for the meeting.
So in other words they're a bit of a shower. Lacking any objectivity or acknowledged standards of rigour, instead applying low or even slovenly levels of basic professionalism. Comparable to a neighbourhood watch group if you will
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,045 Posts
So in other words they're a bit of a shower. Lacking any objectivity or acknowledged standards of rigour, instead applying low or even slovenly levels of basic professionalism. Comparable to a neighbourhood watch group if you will
I know the remuneration paid to most councillors would not enable them to resign their day jobs to do this full-time so we must bear that in mind. But if you put yourself forward as a councillor to sit on the plans panel, you must be prepared to put in the time and effort to justify your place there.

After I left university I worked for a company as a very junior errand boy. But it meant I had to attend board meetings to fetch and carry for them. If board members asked the kind of daft questions that some members of the plans panel ask, they would get slapped down by the chair. And one persistent offender got a very public bollocking after the meeting.

I’d love to see that principle applied here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,836 Posts
21/08190/FU | Hybrid planning application for a phased development; full permission for demolition of existing buildings and structures, site remediation, regrading and preparatory works, erection of four residential buildings (use class C3), townhouses (use class C3 ) and student accommodation (sui generis) with ground floor and other uses comprising any or all of retail, commercial, community, health, cultural and leisure (use classes E, F1 and/or F2) and associated means of access, parking, landscaping, associated infrastructure works and construction of a new river wall and bridge crossing; outline permission, to be implemented in phases, for mixed use development comprising residential use (use class C3); and other uses including all or some of the following: retail, leisure, commercial, health, cultural and community uses (use classes E, F1 and / or F2); car parking, new public spaces; hard and soft landscaping; cycle parking; access; servicing; and other associated infrastructure and engineering works | 10 - 81 Kirkstall Road Burley Leeds LS3 1LH


Planning application is in, its a hybrid application part detailed, part outline.

 
201 - 220 of 235 Posts
Top