Revamped Leeds waterfront plans still concern councillors

Councillors have postponed a decision over the last piece in the jigsaw of development on Leeds's revamped waterfront. Developers aim to demolish the Mission Hut and 28 The Calls and transform existing buildings on The Calls into a bar/restaurant and five-storey office block with basement car parking for 50 cars. There are also plans for a public landscaped terrace area leading onto the waterfront and a riverside walk. Although largely welcoming the proposals, made by Bracken Ltd and CDP Ltd, councillors on the City Centre Plans Panel said they could not approve the plans in their current form because of issues over the height of the western block, lack of greenery and landscaping issues on the public open space and the appearance of windows in the eastern block. Developers have been asked to address the issues and the plans will be brought back before panel either later this month or in August for members to consider. Initial plans for the site were initially heard almost three years ago, with councillors raising a number of concerns over initial proposals. Otley and Yeadon Liberal Democrat councillor Colin Campbell said he was concerned about the larger of the two buildings and its impact on the whole waterfront area in the latest plans. He said: "I am very wary that the site this development occupies isn't that big and I worry about how the larger building dominates the building next to it and how it affects the view from Leeds Bridge. "It is important we get this right - it's an important part of Leeds that has been sympathetically developed so far." Headingley Liberal Democrat councillor James Monaghan added: "This is the last piece of the jigsaw with regards the redevelopment on the waterfront in Leeds, so it needs to be done right. The progress we see in the current plans is very welcome and this is a much improved scheme." But he said that the lack of greenery and landscaping was an issue, as were the 'expanses of blank walls' and suggested that vertical gardens could help soften the area and help prevent graffiti. City and Hunslet Labour councillor Elizabeth Nash agreed the plans were an improvement, but added: "I wish it wasn't quite so high as the adjacent warehouse building looks dwarfed by it. "Looking at the area from Leeds Bridge, it is very much a full stop, not even a large comma. It is over-dominant. Just because we've come a long way with this scheme doesn't mean we should automatically approve it." Guiseley and Rawdon Conservative councillor Graham Latty said: "I do not get any feelings from looking at these plans that the outside area is going to provide an exciting and vibrant part of Leeds. It just looks like a lot of brick and concrete. It doesn't look as if a great deal of thought has been put into it." Burmantofts and Richmond Hill Labour councillor Ron Grahame added: "I have used this spot for more than 20 years and watched it deteriorate. Let's get some action on this development - it's long overdue, I support it so let's get on with the bloody job." Farnley and Wortley Green party councillor David Blackburn said: "We have seen all sorts of proposals for this site, some of them awful, but this is about the best we've seen. There isn't enough green space on it - you need something there to break it up and produce some shade. We've been talking about this for a long time, let's get on with it." Headingley Liberal Democrat Jamie Matthews said he liked the development and was 'broadly supportive' but wanted to see more greenery. A report considered by councillors said that it was 'unlikely that the scheme would be implemented in the near future' after 'issues regarding the viability of the scheme' were raised by the applicant. Councillors voted six in favour, one against and one abstention over Campbell's proposal to defer the application to allow the issues raised to be addressed. Leeds Parish Church plans fail to find favour Plans for 50 flats and office space off The Calls have been criticised for being poorly designed by city councillors. Leeds Parish Church is hoping to partially demolish, refurbish and extend St Peter's Hall and St Peter's House to create three and four-storey buildings. It also hopes to demolish three-storey Chantrell House and build a part three and four storey block in its place. It also proposes to partially demolish and make good a grade II listed boundary wall to Leeds Parish Church. City and Hunslet labour councillor Elizabeth Nash said: "I just don't think it is good enough and it doesn't work in this location. I am really perturbed that a building which is not of first class quality is juxtaposing with a Grade I listed building." Otley and Yeadon Lib Dem Colin Campbell also said that the quality of the proposals weren't good enough. He felt that the loss of existing Victorian windows and a new windowless blank wall 'really ruined that aspect of The Calls'. He added: "Of Chantrell House, the building that is there at the moment isn't one of the greatest, to be honest.I my opinion the new proposals just aren't good enough to go on that particular site. It needs a considerable amount of work to lift it." Headingley Liberal Democrat Jamie Matthews was concerned by the plans, which are in a sensitive part of the city, off The Calls and next to Grade I listed parish church. He said: "This is a total travesty - it is ugly. The original plans we looked at in March were better, I'm not impressed by any of it and the standards are pretty poor." Middleton councillor Geoff Driver added: "This is an important space in the area, but these plans are singularly unattractive for a precinct we are trying to get people to go into." Civic architect John Thorp said that the church had originally approached the council a decade ago with its plans. He added: "It is an extreme conundrum - one of the hardest I have had to deal with." Rather than refuse the plans outright, councillors agreed to defer the application to a future meeting to allow planning officers time to speak to the applicant and find a way forward for the development. Councillors had been asked to give a position statement on the planned development back in March. What do you think about the waterfront and parish church proposals? Have your say in the comments section below.