You are on page 1of 10

Originator: Tel:

Paul Kendall 2478196

Report of the Chief Planning Officer CITY PLANS PANEL Date: 16TH JANUARY 2014 Subject: PRE-APPLICATION PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED WIND MITIGATION MEASURES AT BRIDGEWATER PLACE, JUNCTION OF WATER LANE AND VICTORIA ROAD, LEEDS (PREAPP/13/00693)

Electoral Wards Affected: City and Hunslet

Specific Implications For: Equality and Diversity Community Cohesion Narrowing the Gap

No

RECOMMENDATION: This report is brought to Plans Panel for information. The applicant will present the details of the scheme to allow Members to consider and comment on the proposals at this stage. 1.0 1.1 INTRODUCTION This presentation is intended to inform Members of the emerging proposals for mitigation works to address the wind problems in the vicinity of Bridgewater Place. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The site is a landmark tower building (up to 32 storeys high) located on a main gateway to the south of the city centre. It houses a variety of convenience uses at ground level arranged around a central covered atrium space including shops and cafes. Within the upper floors it provides a mixture of 21,000 sq.m. of office space and over 200 residential apartments in the upper 20 floors.

2.0 2.1

2.2

The site is located at the junction of Water Lane and Victoria Road and lies in a mixed use commercial area to the south side of the River Aire. Immediately to the west and south is the former Halifax call centre building and the Grove Inn pub respectively and immediately to the north, across Water Lane lies the Canal Wharf Conservation Area which comprises a number of former warehouse and mill buildings including some listed buildings now in office and other commercial uses, as well as the Granary Wharf residential, hotel and commercial development. To the east across Victoria Road is the Asda headquarters building. Water Lane and Victoria Road comprise busy three lane highways in the vicinity of the site. The site is separated from the surrounding highways by a large forecourt sweeping around the northern edge of the site. The site is located within flood zone 2. RELEVANT HISTORY Planning permission for Bridgewater Place was granted in November 2001. A wind assessment had been required by condition prior to the building being constructed and this was carried out by BRE Ltd but did not identify any unacceptable impacts or required design modifications. The condition was therefore discharged and no design modifications were made to the building. The current problems which are experienced in relation to high winds around the Water Lane / Victoria Road junction adjacent to Bridgewater Place began to be reported soon after the building was completed in 2007. Since 2008, a number of complaints from pedestrians have been received and some very serious incidents have occurred in relation to the pedestrian wind conditions around the building. In response to this situation an independent specialist wind consultant (CPPI) was appointed jointly by Landmark Developments Ltd / Leeds City Council and Bridgewater Place Design Build Company to identify a permanent solution to the problems being experienced on and off the public highway by people driving high-sided vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians in the vicinity of the building. The wind modeling work which has been undertaken following the construction of Bridgewater Place has demonstrated that the unacceptable wind conditions are attributable to the development. In addition to the above, Leeds City Council (L.C.C.) appointed wind experts Buro Happold to advise on the appropriateness and validity of the wind testing being undertaken by CPPI. Buro Happold attended all meetings with the Developers and advised the Council on the most appropriate solution to address concerns within the highway. CPPI tested various canopy designs through wind tunnel modeling. However, although the canopy proposals did demonstrate improved

2.3

2.4 3.0 3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

conditions for the public in the immediate vicinity of Bridgewater Place, none of the options put forward materially improved conditions within the highway. 3.6 As a result of this, and being insistent that a holistic solution be found, the Council commissioned Buro Happold to look more broadly at further options not previously considered. Buro Happold undertook a computer based testing method (as distinct from actual wind tunnel testing) known as Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) modeling on a number of scenarios during the summer of 2012 and identified a proposal which offers significant wind mitigation within all areas potentially affected by high wind speeds within the highway. In brief, this comprises a canopy on the building in combination with three tall vertical screens on the north-western corner of the Bridgewater Place building and baffles across the highway on Water Lane (this is explained in more detail in section 4.0 below). In order for this to be validated, the CFD modeling test results underwent further wind tunnel testing at the CPPI facilities in America and this confirmed the validity of the proposal. This particular arrangement of baffles and canopies became known as version AH. Tragically in March 2011 a 7.5t high-sided heavy goods vehicle was blown over in high winds adjacent to Bridgewater Place killing one pedestrian and seriously injuring another. The fatality was subject to a coroner's inquest. On 3 December 2013, the coroner recorded a narrative verdict. The Coroner agreed that it was appropriate for the Local Planning Authority to have relied on the BRE wind study report and that planning officers could not be expected to have had a greater knowledge of wind impact mechanics than the countrys leading experts in the field (BRE). The Coroner made the following recommendations to prevent the occurrence of future deaths: 1. Consideration should be given to standardisation of criteria for wind speed reports for tall buildings in the UK; there is none at present; 2. Wind study reports should consider not only pedestrian comfort but also the safety of all Highway users; 3. There may be merit in the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) issuing guidance to all planning authorities regarding the effect of tall buildings on vehicles, all highway users and pedestrian safety; 4. The AH wind mitigation solution has been identified, Nick Sinfield, on behalf of the building owner, said that money would not be an issue and that the works needed to be delivered as soon as possible and gave a timescale of early-mid 2014. The building owner should take all steps to properly ameliorate the wind conditions created by the building; 5. Pending AH being delivered, to prevent more loss of life and until such time as the works were completed, Leeds City Council should ensure the junction with Water Lane, Neville Street and Victoria Street is closed to all highway users as soon as wind speeds reach 20 metres per second. 3.9 In terms of these recommendations, it is considered that national guidance needs to be provided to address the issues raised in points 1-3 above. This

3.7

3.8

report deals with the emerging wind mitigation proposals in response to the Coroners recommendation at point 4. With regards to point 5, L.C.C is considering its position in a report which is scheduled to be taken to Executive Board on 18th February 2014. However, Members should note that a protocol had already been adopted for ensuring highway safety around Bridgewater Place which consisted of the following: Employing a variable message sign on Victoria Road visible to traffic entering the city centre past Bridgewater Place giving a warning of gusty winds when wind gust speeds reach 15m/s (35mph); Diversion of all high sided vehicles from the junction of Victoria Road/Water Lane/Neville Street when wind gust speeds reach 20m/s (45mph); Closing the road to all vehicles when wind speeds of 30m/s (approx. 65mph) are reached.

3.10

On Thursday 5th December 2013 high winds exceeding 65mph were forecast. In accordance with the above protocol, Leeds City Council implemented a road closure to all vehicles (including cyclists) at the junction of Victoria Road/Neville Street/Water Lane between the hours of 6am and 4pm. This was the first time that the thresholds for a road closure under the above Leeds City Council protocol had been reached and the first time the road had been closed. Since that initial closure the road has also been closed on both 27th and 30th December. Also, in the interim, and prior to the Executive Board meeting, L.C.C. have decided to follow the advice of the Coroner and implement a road closure when gusts exceeding 20m/s are forecast and will continue to monitor conditions at the site on an on-going basis. The Coroner agreed with L.C.C.s recommendation that wind impact studies need to be standardized and that planning authorities nationally would benefit from centrally issued guidance. However, in the absence of this standardized approach, acting as a responsible Local Planning Authority, we must now seek to ensure that the wind mitigation scheme achieves the best possible outcome for the pedestrian and vehicular environment in the vicinity of the building. In addition to the protocol referred to above at para. 3.9, and in advance of a permanent wind mitigation solution, Leeds City Council has also undertaken highway work to manage the current risks around the site for vehicles, especially high-sided vehicles (including public service vehicles - PSVs), pedestrians and cyclists/motorcyclists. This has included the provision of guard rails to the edge of the pavement along Water Lane and the implementation of permanent warning signage for cyclists and pedestrians. Guard rails were put in place pursuant to the existing Section 278 Agreement between the developer and the council. A second anemometer (wind speed and direction measuring device) was erected at the site by the Council in 2013. Wind forecast data specific to the site is also obtained from the Met Office.

3.11

3.12

3.13

3.14

It is intended that the emerging mitigation works detailed below will avoid the requirement to close the road and avoid adverse health and safety impacts on the public highway. There is a clear desire from L.C.C. to achieve a comprehensive solution to this as quickly as possible. PROPOSALS Further to the collaborative approach undertaken by the Council and the owners of Bridgewater Place, the building owner has commissioned work to design and obtain planning permission for wind amelioration measures based on the wind analysis findings and potential solution AH. The proposed design will have to ensure that there will be safe vehicular, cyclist and pedestrian access to and from the site and on the adjacent highway whilst still delivering the wind mitigation benefits of the AH solution. The building owners design team is looking at these detailed issues which will be presented at Panel. The emerging design comprises the following components:1. 4 wind baffles to be located across Water Lane. Each would measure 4m deep and would be set 6m above the carriageway at their lowest point. This would result in a total height of approximately 10m. Each structure would be approximately 20m long. 2. A series of vertical screens to be placed on the north western corner of the building which vary in height between 12m & 18m. These would be both ground and building fixed 3. 1 glass canopy covering approximately 50% of the forecourt depth but running the full length of the northern elevation to Water Lane and continuing along the north west elevation above the residential and car park entrances; 4. A further local amelioration measure to the southern end of the Bridgewater Place building to the east of The Grove public house. This would take the form of a vertical screen approximately 4m high.

4.0 4.1

4.2

4.3

Although many variations of the baffles were CFD modelled, the optimum amelioration solution comprised 4 no. porous baffles (porous referring to the fact that the surface would be a perforated metal sheet, allowing some of the air to pass through it, in order to dissipate its impact). Each baffle would have at least 2 support columns to each end. The impact of the scheme on the highway is being discussed and developed with the Council and the Highways Authority. Considerations for the detailed design of the baffles include: (a) (b) (c) (d) requirements for pedestrian and vehicle movements; existing utilities & underground services; acoustics; sightlines;

(e) (f) (g) (h)

street lighting; existing traffic lights, landscaping and street signage. Highway Standards Maintenance

4.4

It should also be noted that, due to the location of statutory undertakers equipment in this part of the highway, it is currently proposed that the baffle support columns on the northern side of Water Lane be located in what is currently the carriageway, with the kerb being realigned to accommodate this. This would reduce the length of the current tapered left turn lane from Water Lane in to Neville St, although a dedicated, but shorter, lane would still exist. Highways Services colleagues would expect to see traffic flow modelling of this junction as part of any future planning application to ensure that the junction can still function efficiently. The flexible use of the highway is required to enable the mitigation measures to be constructed and demonstrates the commitment of L.C.C. to achieving the best possible solution. The location of the support columns, and the way they are accommodated within the footway, will also have to be carefully considered to avoid creating a hazard to pedestrians and to achieve a positive visual appearance. The proposed canopy frame supports and the vertical screens will be formed from steel column and beam components to be finished in a similar style and colour as the main Bridgewater Place building. The vertical screens at the north-western corner will be structurally designed to provide lateral restraint to the canopy and horizontal components. Lateral restraint back to the main building is also proposed to support the canopy and screens. Considerations for the detailed design of the canopy and screens include: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) requirements for pedestrian and vehicle movements; acoustics; weather; drainage; maintenance; existing lighting; existing traffic lights, landscaping and street signage.

4.5

4.6

In addition, it is the owners intention to hold a public consultation event on Saturday 8th February 2014. This will take the form of an exhibition in Bridgewater Pl at which members of the developer team will be available to

answer questions. This will be advertised in the local press and by direct invitation in the case of identifiable local stakeholders and residents. A Statement of Community Involvement will be produced in line with L.C.C. guidance which would accompany any subsequent planning application. 5.0 POLICY OVERVIEW Unitary Development Plan Review (UDPR) 5.1 The site is located in a designated Prestige Development Area which have been identified to accommodate large scale city centre related uses and to provide opportunity for achieving buildings which, due to their relative height and design excellence, would act as landmarks, signaling a prestigious entry into the city centre. Other relevant UDPR policies include: GP5 (detailed planning considerations to be resolved) BD5 (ensure a satisfactory level of amenity for occupants and surroundings) N12, N13, CC3 and BD6 (priorities for good quality urban design) T2 (development should not create or materially add to problems of safety or efficiency on the highway network) A4 (design of safe and secure environments, including access arrangements, public space, servicing and maintenance, materials and lighting). T5 and T6 require satisfactory provision for disabled people, pedestrians and cyclists. 5.2 5.2.1 Draft Core Strategy (DCS) The Core Strategy sets out strategic level policies and vision to guide the delivery of development investment decisions and the overall future of the district. On 26th April 2013 the Council submitted the Publication Draft Core Strategy to the Secretary of State for examination. The examination took place in October 2013. As the Council has submitted the Publication Draft Core Strategy for independent examination some weight can now be attached to the document and its contents recognising that the weight to be attached may be limited by outstanding representations which have been made. Policy T2 identifies satisfactory accessibility requirements. Policy P10 requires new development to be based on a thorough contextual analysis to provide good design appropriate to its scale and function, delivering high quality innovative design and enhancing existing landscapes and spaces, and requires that development protects and enhances the districts historic assets in particular existing natural site features, historically and locally important buildings, skylines and views. Conservation Policy P11 states that innovative and sustainable construction which integrates with and enhances the historic environment will be encouraged.

5.1.2

5.2.2

5.3 5.3.1

Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan 2013 (NRWLP) The Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan was adopted by Leeds City Council on 16th January 2013. Policy Water 4 requires developments in flood risk areas to consider the effect of the proposed development on flood risk, both on-site and off-site including through submission of a flood risk assessment (Water 6). Supplementary guidance Tall Buildings Design Guide Spring 2010 requires that the design of tall buildings create active ground level frontages to adjacent streets and should provide high quality public realm, user friendly and legible entrances, good street level architecture and a good microclimate and comfort zone with counteraction to downdraughts. City Centre Urban Design Strategy September 2000 seeks to reinforce the positive qualities of character areas, re-establish urban grain, provide enclosure to streets, create visual interest, encourage excellent design, improve pedestrian connections, and promote active frontages. Leeds Waterfront Strategy 2002 (Review 2006) guides the regeneration of Leeds Waterfront through use, links and appropriate environmental enhancement. National Planning Policy Framework Planning should seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings (para. 17). Local Planning Authorities should recognise town centres as the heart of their communities and support their vitality and viability; Design requirements are set out in section 7 noting that developments should establish a strong sense of place creating attractive and comfortable places to live, work and visit (para. 58). ISSUES Wind mitigation Much work has already been carried out in an attempt to find a solution to the problems that currently exist. The design which is emerging from the wind modeling and testing work has established that physical alterations can be made, both to the building frontage and within the adjacent highway, which would help to address the identified wind problems around the site. The applicant will demonstrate in their presentation the potential to resolve the cyclist and pedestrian distress conditions which have been identified around the building in extreme weather conditions. The proposed mitigation work would also improve wind conditions within the adjacent highway. However, it must be remembered that work is still in progress and that

5.4 5.4.1

5.4.2

5.4.3

5.5 5.5.1

6.0 6.1 6.1.1

testing will continue to be carried out as the design is moved towards the final scheme Are Members satisfied that all potential wind issues around the site have been considered and will be appropriately mitigated? Are Members satisfied with the extent of the area covered by the wind study? Is there any further work Members would wish to be undertaken by the owner/applicants? 6.2 6.2.1 Design The design of the mitigation works is still evolving, however, it is clear that the proposal will represent a significant physical intervention both within the street scene and to the base of the building. Given this fact, it is clear that the appearance of the mitigation measures is an important consideration. The applicant will present a model and visual images of how the proposals can be designed to provide visual interest and coherence with the modern design of Bridgewater Place, whilst still performing the necessary task of ameliorating the adverse wind conditions around the site. It is considered that the emerging design of the glass canopy with rounded steel columns relates well to the modern aesthetic and form of the base of the tower building and would be seen as a sympathetic extension to its podium element. In addition, although large in nature, the mitigation works would be seen from the north, west and east, in the context of a tall dominant building with a large frontage and this will help to reduce their visual impact on more distant views. The impact of the baffle support columns on the footway is another important consideration. They will be located on both sides of Water Lane and, as there are at least 4 no. columns for each baffle, this means that a minimum of 16 no. columns will need to be accommodated. They also have to be of a size which will enable them to withstand the forces to be placed on them and positioned to avoid statutory undertakers equipment. The development of this aspect is on-going and will be informed by structural considerations as well as on-site survey and underground investigation work. With regard to impact on the adjacent Canal Wharf Conservation Area, the historic nature of the area is clearly defined by Water Lane with the context changing immediately to the south of Water Lane to more modern and larger scale buildings. Also the former listed mill buildings are sited back from Water Lane and further to the west than the proposed baffles. It is therefore considered that the emerging proposals would very much relate to the modern scale and character of Bridgewater Place and would not adversely affect the setting and character of the adjacent conservation area.

6.2.2

6.2.3

6.2.4

Given the size of the structures to be in place in this prominent location, are Members supportive of an approach which achieves the necessary wind mitigation but also advances an attractive design as well? Are there any other issues which Members would wish to see considered?

Background Papers: Application reference 20/337/00/FU (as amended by application reference 20/339/04/FU)

You might also like