Marshall’s Mill Holbeck

Design Statement Revised 8th August 2004 Prepared by... URBED with Bauman Llyons Architects Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

For Igloo

URBED 10 Little Lever Street MANCHESTER M1 1RF t. 0161 200 5500 f. 0161 237 3994 19 Store Street LONDON WC1E 7DH t. 0207 436 8050 f. 0207 436 8083 [email protected] Marshall’s Mill Holbeck Contents

Introduction 1 3b Masterplanning structure 19 3c Masterplan form 21 PART 1: The Leeds context 2 3d Masterplan blocks 23 1a Leeds 3 3e Masterplan massing 24 1b The development of Leeds 5 3f. Masterplan townscape and Heritage 25 3g. Proposed Uses 26 PART 2: The Holbeck Urban Village Area 6 3h. Public Realm 27 2a The development of Holbeck 7 2b History of the Site 8 PART 4: Transport Strategy 28 2c The area today 11 4a. The curent situation 29 2c The area today (continued) 12 4b. Access strategy 31 2d Townscape Analysis 13 4c. Parking and servicing 33 2e Policy context 14 PART 5: Socially Responsible Investment 34 5a. Sustainable energy strategy 35 PART 3: Masterplan Development 16 5a. Daylight and overshadowing 37 3a Reconnecting Holbeck Urban Village 17 5b. Wind assessment 39

A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Introduction

This design statement has been pro- The masterplan for Marshall’s duced in support of the outline planning Mill proposes a mixed-use, application for the Marshall’s Mill site dense urban quarter that can that is being submitted to Leeds City contribute positively to the Council by Igloo. This document has development of the wider urban been prepared by URBED with inputs village from Martin Stockley Associates, King Sturge and Bauman Lyons Architects. The Design statement is in five parts: The Marshall’s Mill site – illus- trated on the plan to the left – includes Part 1: Looks at the Leeds context, 2.1ha of land in the Holbeck area. The the city today and its development. triangular site is bounded by Bath Road, Water Lane, Marshall Street and Un- Part 2: Describes the Holbeck Urban ion Place and lies within the Holbeck Village area including its historical Conservation area. The site falls within development, the area today, and the the Holbeck Urban Village which is be- current policy context. ing promoted by Leeds City Council and Yorkshire Forward. Part 3: Describes the development The masterplan for Marshall’s of the masterplan including our Mill proposes a mixed-use, dense urban analysis of the way that it fits within quarter that can contribute positively the planning context for Holbeck. to the development of the wider urban village. This planning application has Part 4: Describes the masterplan been prepared following discussions including the design form, block with Leeds City Council and Yorkshire structure, height and massing, herit- Forward and in parallel with the emerg- age and townscape, land use, public ing Supplementary Planning Guidance realm and access. for Holbeck Urban Village. The propos- als set out in this document are entirely Part 5: Describes the Socially in line with this emerging vision for the Responsible Investment analysis area. developed for the Masterplan. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

PART 1: The Leeds context Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

1a Leeds

Leeds is the second largest metropoli- A large part of the growth in em- and 26% in print and publishing. The tan district in the UK and is the regional ployment will be in creative and city is predicted to provide 37% of the capital of Yorkshire and the Humber. media industries. Holbeck Urban regions additional employment by 2012. The city has a population of Village is one of the potential Forecasts predict job growth of 8.4% 715,000 with 2.2m people living within growth areas for these sectors (an additional 36,000 jobs) in Leeds a 30 minute driving time of the city over the 2002-2012 period. A large part centre. The working age population is The £26m Grand Theatre improve- of the growth in the employment sector forecast to rise by 8,000 over the next ments. will be in the creative media industries decade to 468,000 and the labour force with over 13,000 people and 1,700 will rise by 4,000 over the next decade Feasibility work is also being under- employers. Holbeck Urban Village is one to 374,000. Unemployment stands at taken into a possible new convention of the potential growth areas for these around 12,500 and the unemployment centre in the city. creative industries. rate has fallen from a 9.3% peak in 1993 to 2.8%. Employment Property Like many of the UK’s provincial cities Leeds has been experiencing a There are 442,000 people working in Since 1992, £5.2bn has been invested, period of economic growth which is Leeds including 55,000 self employed. or is in the pipeline for major property reflected in the amount of construction The city has achieved sustained em- schemes in Leeds. The commercial taking place in the city centre. A number ployment growth and low unemploy- property market remains buoyant and Marshall’s Mill of major projects are planned and un- ment and between 1996 and 2001 more at the beginning of 2002, property derway at the present time: jobs were created in Leeds than in any schemes valued at £650m were under construction in Leeds and £2.7bn of Main Plan: The Leeds conurbation, major city outside London - 34,000 one of the emerging plans from the The new £26m City Museum (due in total. 29% of the employment is in schemes were proposed. Of these, 70% Leeds City Masterplan. Right: Proposed development at for completion 2007). finance and business services, 35% in and 58% respectively were city centre Bridgewater Place on the edge of the schemes. Holbeck area legal services, 13% in manufacturing The new £5 m theatre and arts centre in Millennium Square (due for completion 2005).

The new £9m Northern Ballet Thea- tre and Phoenix Dance headquarters (due for completion 2004). Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

View of Holbeck looking towards Leeds in 1858

1821 Whole town Figure Ground Plan Whole town Figure Ground Plan today

1851 1894 1909 1938 2002 Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

1b The development of Leeds

URBED’s approach to masterplanning is way to the city from the south. indeed been reinforced in the period be- based on, what we call the ‘Three Rs’, The remainder of the area to the tween this and the earlier plan. However Rediscovery, Repair and Renewal. For south of the river was originally market major transport infrastructure has been this reason our masterplanning work gardens serving the city. This was scat- driven into the city on the line of least starts with a historical reading of the site tered with a number of villages including resistance along the river. The first piece to understand how and why it developed. Holbeck, Holbeck Moor, Beeston Hill of infrastructure was the canal but much We have therefore undertaken a histori- and Hunslet Moor. As Leeds developed, more important were the railways that cal review of the growth of Leeds as it these market gardens were developed arrived in the 1840s. The main station affects Holbeck. This is set out on the along the roads between these villages. was built over the river and the tracks sequence of ‘figure ground’ plans on the The Round Foundary site and Marshall’s were bought in on a series of elevated facing page. Mills were some of the earliest sites to viaducts. This cut off the southern parts Figure ground plans are a useful be developed in this way. of Leeds even more from the city. The method to uncover the urban structure As the sequence of plans of Leeds picture was completed by the M621 mo- of an area. They show the density of city centre illustrates (below left with torway that penetrated into this part of development but also the way in which Marshall’s Mill appearing in the bottom Leeds. The road infrastructure between buildings enclose space. The larger left corner) as Leeds grew there was a the motorway and the City Centre served plans show the whole city with the circle period when the Marshall’s Mill site was to further undermine the structure of this drawn at a mile radius from the city connected to the city despite the sever- part of the city. centre. The left hand plan is from 1821 ance effect of the river. It was during this The effect of this can be seen and shows the historic shape of the city. period that many of the fine buildings clearly on the whole town figure ground This grew up as a ‘T’ junction between of the area were erected. However as plan. The city centre is shown as a the Headrow and Briggate predominantly the city contracted, the Holbeck Urban coherent, densely built-up area. There The area developed as an in- to the north of the River Aire. The single Village area once more became isolated is a small shatter zone to the north west dustrial district in fields between bridge over the Aire allowed the city to from the centre. and east of the centre. However to the Leeds the Holbeck, cut-off from extend south of the river for a little way This is illustrated on the second south there is a complete lack of form the city north of the river. As but this was limited to development whole-town figure ground which shows and identity. This area has a low density Leeds reached its zenith, the around the junction of Dewsbury Road Leeds today. This shows that the historic of development and lacks a clear sense area was briefly a functional part and Meadow Lane that formed a gate- structure of Leeds has persisted and of structure or enclosure of urban space. of the city before being left once more isolated as the centre contracted. Above: Leeds 1851 Below: View of Holbeck 1785 Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

PART 2: The Holbeck Urban Village Area Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

1. The Figure ground plan: This shows 2. Water: The middle plan shows the 3. Roads: The next plan is an analysis blocks. The Marshall’s Mill site in 2a The development of Holbeck the way that the Marshall’s Mill and water in the area including the two of the roads in the area. This shows particular stretches from Water Lane Round Foundary complex developed Holbeck Becks. It is likely that Little two types of roads. The winding to Sweet Street and from Marshall in the gap between Holbeck Village Holbeck Beck (which runs immedi- routes, such as Water Lane, are the Street across to Holbeck Village. that can be seen to the south west of ately to the south of Marshall’s Mill) original lanes that ran between the This has since been reduced in size the plan and the city to the north- was the original line of the water villages. By contrast the straight by the introduction of Bath Road The development of the Holbeck area is back-to-back houses and to the west west. The regular plans of terraces course, now culverted. The northern routes like Sweet Street and White- but it still constitutes a very large described on the plans below which are of these there were two mill ponds that can be seen developing along Sweet water course which on the plan is hall Road were newly built at the urban block, probably because it based on the 1840 map (see previous extended over the line of what is now Street. The main part of Holbeck called Holbeck Brook runs along time that the map was draw and to was based on field boundaries. The page). In 1840 Marshall’s Mill was part Bath Road. Village shown on this plan no longer Water Lane and appears to be a open up the area to development. way in which we deal with this urban of a wider complex of buildings on a exists. This is now part of a modern constructed watercourse, possibly to However, despite these new roads, block structure has been an impor- triangular site that extended to the listed The Marshall’s Mill complex industrial area and there are only a serve the mill ponds on the Mar- the roads structure is very course tant part of the masterplan develop- wall that remains on the site today. To developed in the gap between few remnants of this village on the shall’s Mill Site as well as the canal. leading to very large development ment. the west of this wall were two rows of Holbeck Village and the city ground. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Buildings on Sweet Street Terraces to the rear of Marshall’s Mill School promoted by Marshall John Marshall 2b History of the Site

Marshall’s Mill is named after John into the factory buildings to regulate 1815 for the spinning and bleaching of Marshall the mill owner, entrepreneur and temperature. He believed that “the only linen and flax. It made an early transi- philanthropist. John Marshall was born in way to promote the improvement of the tion to steam power and became the 1765 to a linen draper. Educated in Hali- rising generation was through educa- world’s first mechanised flax factory. fax, he joined the family business when tion” and by 1822 he had persuaded It expanded over the century with the he was seventeen. At the age of twenty other business men to establish a addition of the two wings to the rear two his father died and John became the school in Holbeck teaching younger and by 1903 employed over a thousand controlling partner in the family busi- children during the day and the older people. Marshall’s Mill was also re- ness as well as inheriting a new home, a children in the evening after their shift at stored in 1997 and converted into office warehouse and £7,500 in cash. the mill. He was also involved in found- accommodation. Soon after this he came across a ing the Mechanics Institute and the new patent for a flax spinning machine Literary and Philosophical Society and Temple Works: Temple Works (which invented in Darlington. He purchased in 1826 began a campaign to establish lies outside the application site) was the right to make copies of this machine the University of Leeds. Marshall was commissioned by Marshall to house im- and, with two partners, took a lease on a member of the House of Commons proved spinning machines. It is the most Scotland Mill near Leeds where he be- from 1827 to 1930 when he stepped outstanding industrial building in Leeds gan spinning flax. There were however down due to ill health. He retired to the and its structure was unique and highly problems with the quality of the yarn Lake District where he died in 1845. energy efficient for its time. Designed by which was prone to breakage. Work- Joseph Bonomi, the single story building ing with the engineer Matthew Murray, Marshall’s Mills buildings include: covers two acres and was influenced he developed an effective flax spinning by his travels to Egypt to the temple of machine and in 1890 he paid William Marshall’s Court: This stands at the Horus at Edfu. Workers benefited from Nayor £600 for an acre of land at Water corner of Marshall Street and Water the 65 conical glass domes in the roof Lane in Holbeck to build a spinning mill. Lane and dates from 1808. It is the and temperature and humidity, crucial to After a shaky start the business pros- smallest and one of the earliest of the spinning process, was maintained pered and grew into the buildings that Marshall’s buildings and is a plain, un- by a grass roof. For many years Temple are now Marshall’s Place, Marshall’s assuming three storey structure. It lay Works had sheep grazing on the roof to Above: Plan of the Holbeck area with road heirarchy,1893 Mill and Temple Works. vacant for many years and was restored provide wool and keep the grass short, Right: View towards Leeds from Marshall took a keen interest in in 1997. a practice discontinued when a sheep Holbeck Junction the well-being of his workforce. Over- fell through the one of the glass domes. seers where forbidden to use corporal Marshall’s Mill: This large, multi-storey punishment and Marshall installed fans mill the first part of which was built in Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

After a shaky start Marshall’s business prospered and grew into the buildings that are now Marshall’s Place, Marshall’s Mill and Temple Works.

In addition to the Marshall’s buildings, The printing works was built of brick In addition to Temple works, a number the site includes a number of other with two storey offices with a nine bay of the adjacent buildings are also histori- structures or historic interest: symmetrical facade, a central arched cally significant. doorway and wide gable with a clock. Boundary Wall: The wall that forms Although the building is not listed it is Round Foundry: Matthew Murray, the the western boundary of the original recognised as Class 3 Archeological engineer employed by John Marshall Marshall’s site is listed for part of its Value and lies within the Holbeck Con- to develop the flax-spinning machine, Left: Aerial view of the area at the peak of its development length. The northern section of the servation area. developed the Round Foundry in 1802. Below: Marshall’s Street Bottom left: An interior view wall includes a small ancillary building It was here that he manufactured textile of Temple Works which is part of the listing. The southern The Flax Warehouse: Built in 1838 machinery and steam engines. Murray sections of the wall are not listed but this building stands in the centre of the earned himself an international reputa- are considered important as part of the site. It was originally three storeys but tion as an innovative engineer whose listed curtilage of the main mill. had the top floor removed. It is built of inventions drove forward the industrial fire proof construction with brick vaults. revolution and was even commissioned Water Lane Printing Works: This This structure is recognised by Leeds as to build a steam launch for the Tsar of building was constructed in 1898 and a building of local importance. Russia. The Round Foundry complex was the premises of Knight and Illson. has been converted into series of media use offices and 88 apartments for sale.

Tower Works: This site is known for its three chimneys known as the Giotto Tower, the Verona Tower and the Little Tower. These chimneys where inspired by Giotto’s Campanile in Florence and Verona’s Lamberti Tower and are an important landmark on the approach to Leeds by train. They where used to extract dust from the factory which to manufactured cast steel pins, cards and combs until 1979. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

2c The area today

This historical analysis has informed a infrastructure is the disused elevated more important as the arches become The historic street A large amount of traffic is chan- review of the Holbeck Urban Village area viaduct that bounds the area to the west. established and as the canal side sites structure persists nelled onto the through routes today. This is set out on the plans run- There are proposals to convert this via- are developed. There is also a possibil- today, creating very while the remainder of the area ning through this section. duct into an elevated walkway and park ity that this route will link to an new large urban blocks feel disconnected from the rest so that it could become an important low level concourse for the station that and limiting perme- of the city. Urban structure: The first of these plans asset to the site. The other railway lines is being suggested by the Leeds City ability through the is the contempory figure ground plan are however negative features in that improvement of the headroom on the masterplan. The second important route area. that illustrates the built structure of the they are at a lower level and so not eas- Sweet Street bridge under the railway. is the proposed new bridge across the area. This can be usefully contrasted ily crossed as well as being an intrusive This will improve the environment on River and the canal from the north. This with the plan on the previous page. It source of noise. Water Lane but may push more traffic will create a much needed pedestrian shows that the structure of the Round down Marshall Street. This is described route from the new apartment develop- Foundary and Marshall’s Mill sites have Street network: The third plan shows in more detail by Martin Stockley As- ments and retail development north of remained but that the surrounding areas the street network of the area (set within sociates in the accessibility section. the river. These pedestrian routes have have been transformed. The housing the context of the wider street network). the potential to once again knit the Hol- to the south of the area and the whole This is based on a simple three level Footpath links: In addition to the street beck Urban Village area into the wider of Holbeck Village have been swept hierarchy. The blue routes are primary network there are a number of pedes- city. They mean that the development away to be replaced with industrial and streets that carry traffic through the trian routes through the area. The most will become much more accessible on commercial development. The area area. The green streets are second- important of these is the route that runs foot to the city centre and will therefore has become an important employment ary streets that cater for local traffic between Marshall’s Mill and Temple become an increasingly attractive resi- location but operates as something of and the yellow streets are cul-de-sacs. Works. This is marked on the historic dential and business area. a backwater where low land values and This plan shows that the historic street plans as a footpath between Holbeck land availability have allowed industry to structure described in the previous and Leeds and was important enough develop. section persists today. This creates very to be preserved as a route under the large urban blocks and limits perme- railway viaducts (today sadly neglected Rail and water infrastructure: The ability through the area. A large amount and dangerous). This route also has the figure ground plan shows large areas of traffic is channelled onto the through potential to link with the new footpath where there are no buildings. These routes while the remainder of the area route on the railway viaduct. The viaduct make more sense when the water and feels disconnected from the rest of the also allows links to be made into central particularly the rail infrastructure is city. Currently the main traffic movement Leeds. shown on the plan. The main railway through the area is on Water Lane and There are two other important lines into Leeds Central station circle Globe Road connecting to the western routes into the area from the north. The the area to the south, west and north. Ring Road. There are plans to transfer first is the route under the Dark Arches However the most prominent piece of this traffic onto Sweet Street with the and across the canal. This will become Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

2c The area today (continued)

Land use: Works and a series of very large Development Proposals Blue, Granary Wharf: This striking build- premises to the south of this. ing is under construction on a site next to The area is characterised by a mix There has been a major upsurge in de- the station. It will include 61 new homes of commercial and industrial uses as Creative industries: New creative velopments in Leeds, including the areas with mixed uses on the ground floor. detailed below: and multi media developments are that fall within the Holbeck Urban Village. The building overlooks the Leeds and starting to develop in the area, par- A number of developments underway or Liverpool Canal. Industry: The area remains predomi- ticularly in the Round Foundary and recently completed in the area. nantly an industrial and commercial Marshall’s Mills. Tower Works: This site has planning area. The land to the south, west and Round Foundry: The Round Foundry is consent for a scheme designed by Carey east of the site is characterised by Housing: There has not been resi- being developed for creative insustries Jones Architects. The development will small scale commercial premises. dential property in the area for many and studio space. As part of this Crosby include public space realm at the foot years. The nearest housing is in Hol- Homes have developed the site on the of the towers along with 350 residential Office development: This is gradual- beck where there is a mix of property corner of Marshall Street and Water appartments, 5,500sq ft of office space ly changing with development of new including extensive areas of back- Lane for 88 residential units with offices, and a mixture of cafes and restaraunts. office development along the canal to-back housing and tower blocks. shops and bars. and Victoria Road. These offices are However the recently completed Leeds Canal Basin: Isis are develop- gradually extending into the area. The Crosby scheme is the first residential Bridgewater Place: This major develop- ing proposals for a mixed use waterside conversion of Marshall’s Mill and incursion into the area. ment on the corner of Water Lane and development between the canal and the Marshall’s Court in the late 1990s Victoria Road started on site in July Dark Arches. This will include two resi- was a significant impetus to this. Underused land: There are a number 2003. It includes a 30 storey office tower dential blocks and a commercial block. of vacant sites in the area as shown at the southern gateway to the city centre Whitehall Riverside: Various develop- Mail Order: To the south of Mar- on the landuse plan. These are prone and will become Leed’s tallest build- ments are taking place at Whitehall Quay shall’s Mill the predominant use to fly tipping. The area around the ing. The ground floor of the building will including The Thistle Hotel HQ, appart- is mail order including the Temple railway arches still has a number of include cafes and restaraunts. ments, shops, restaraunts and bars. yard uses which do little to enhance the area.

Open Space: There is no public open space within Holbeck. The nearest significant area of space is to the south on Nineveh Road which is an extesion of Holbeck Moor. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

2d Townscape analysis

As part of the masterplanning process are important local landmarks. However In many respects the area’s we have undertaken an assessment of because of the street-based nature of character is derived more from the townscape of the area as illustrated the layout there are few really good its landmarks than its form and on the plan to the right. vistas. Perhaps the most important is street based character. The character of the area is cur- the view north along Marshall Street. rently very mixed. The upper part of Mar- to this there are a number of buildings There is also a view along the curve of shall Street has a very urban enclosure that are of local interest including the Water Lane. However because the Mar- and retains some of the grandeur that Flax warehouse, the Water Lane printing shall’s mill site is on the inside of this can be seen on the historical engraving works and Midlands Mills, between the curve it is not particularly prominent in on page 9. However, elsewhere there is railway viaducts. this view. There is a view within the site very little character or enclosure to the towards one of the chimney/towers. streets and public spaces of the area, in Conservation areas: There are two This is not a traditional view and is over part because it has been lost and in part conservation areas in Holbeck, the Canal the roof of Marshall’s Court and partly because it never existed. Water Lane Wharf and the Holbeck Conservation obscured by the new Crosby scheme. It retains some of its character, a unique area. The boundaries of these areas are does however provide a visual connec- part of which is the beck that runs on drawn very tightly and the Holbeck area tion to the towers from the centre of the its northern site edge and the bridges excludes Tower Works and Midlands site. crossing this into the industrial premises. Mills. The Council is planning to extend The road also has some good frontages, the Holbeck conservation area as shown shown in blue on the plan, which follow on the plan. This will extend the length of a consistent building line. However the Water Lane to include the remaining core street is dominated by traffic and does of the original Holbeck Village. It will how- not create a pleasant environment. ever still exclude the south west section of the Holbeck site. Listed Buildings: The area includes 17 Key listed buildings, foremost of which is the Views and Landmarks: In many respects Listed buildings Grade 1 listed Temple Works. Marshall’s the area’s character is derived more from Other notable buildings Existing conservation area Mill is Grade 2* and Marshall’s Court its landmarks than its form and street- Proposed conservation area is Grade 2. The northern section of the based character. It is known to millions of Panoramic views wall bounding the site to the west is also people because of the prominence of the Vistas listed. Other listed buildings in the sur- tower works chimneys from the railway Quality frontage rounding area include the Round Foundry line. This view is an important panoramic Landmarks and elements of tower works. In addition view. Marshall’s Mill and Temple works Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

2e Policy context

Planning Policy Context A strategic open space network along Strong linkages to surrounding com- the Aire Valley. munities so that they can benefit The adopted Leeds UDP (2001) rec- from employment opportunities. ognises the importance of Holbeck as The reorganisation of Leeds Station an area which formed the cornerstone with the possibility of a new concorse The minimisation of car use. of the industrial revolution in Leeds. It at a lower level feeding into the Dark sets the priorities as the refurbishment Arches. Energy efficient builings to create an and conservation of listed and historic ‘exemplar flagship development’. buildings and the development of vacant A network of strategic routes linking sites. A wide variety of uses are consid- communities together and into the A diverse place with a mix of uses ered appropriate in addition to the exist- city centre. and a strong sense of community. ing workshop and service uses. Holbeck Urban Village is recognised as a new A tall building cluster to the east of A distinctive character based on community with Policy H3-1B identifying Holbeck in the in the southern ap- restoring and reusing old buildings. the area as a strategic site for residential proaches to the twon centre. and mixed-use development. Complimentary modern architecture The masterplan includes physical pro- that respects the historic footprint of Leeds Vision Masterplan: As part of posals for most of the central part of the old buildings. the Yorkshire Forward Renaissance city and is entirely compatable with the Cities programme, Koeter Kim Associ- proposals set out in this document. High quality public realm – 20% ates have been working with Leeds City of the area to be publicly accessible Council on a masterplanning framework Supplementary Planning open space. for the entire council area. This is cur- Guidance rently being written up. It is however Active ground floor uses with an likely to include the following elements Planning guidance was produced for emphasis on retail, food, drink and of relevance to the Holbeck Urban Vil- Holbeck Urban Village (SPG 12) in 1999 leisure uses. lage area: to guide the development of the area. This is currently being updated and The relocation of incompatable uses The BDP masterplan for Holbeck prepared in The plan is based on a series of revised guidance is to be the subject of on strategic sites. February 2001 overlapping petals each representing consultation over the coming months. a series of neighbouroods linked to This guidance emphasises: 25% affordable housing for rent, sale the City Centre. Holbeck forms one or shared ownership. of these petals. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Plans to develop Holbeck as an Urban Village were first conceived in the mid 1990’s. A masterplan was commissioned which was published in February 2001.

Urban Design Principles mentation of the urban village proposals. A simple pallet of materials through- That SPG 12 be re-written to reflect As part of this Gillespies prepared the out the area with variety created the vision for the area and to provide High quality materials such as sand- Holbeck Urban Village Regeneration through public art, light, texture and site-specific guidance for developers. stone, blue slate and red brick. Study in November 2002 to set out a local detailing. strategy for the public realm of the area. That new housing schemes should High quality public realm. This included the following objectives: As part of this strategy Gillespies pro- incorporate 25% social housing to duced specific proposals for Bath Road avoid stand-alone schemes. Entrances to be taken off the main The creation of a unique sense of and the railway arches which impact streets. place with contemporary, simple, directly on the Marshall’s Mill site. That affordable workspace should be elegant design. Their scheme envisaged that Bath Road provided to assist business start-ups. Developments should be at height, would become an active street with a scale, plot ratio and massing to A public realm that contributes to the variety of activities taking place making That business support be provided compliment adjacent buildings. diversity and excitement of the area. it an important link into Leeds from the through a single point of contact to surrounding areas. ensure local communities benefit Traditional building lines to be A public realm that respects the Another report completed at this and to attract, manage and distribute respected and new buildings built to historic importance of the area. time was the Holbeck Urban Village funding from various sources. back of pavement. Implementation and Delivery Strategy An enhanced pedestrian environment (November 2002). This was prepared A further report was produced by GVA Urban Village Proposals for residents and businesses. by GVA Grimleys and recommended: Grimleys in May 2003 to look at the development potential of the Marshall’s Plans to develop Holbeck as an Urban Useful, meaningful spaces that re- That a special purpose delivery ve- Mills site. This investigated the oppor- Village were first conceived in the mid spond to the activities around them. hicle be established as a partnership tunities and constraints of the site and 1990’s. A masterplan of the area was between Yorkshire Forward, Leeds its potential to contribute to the Urban commissioned from a team led by BDP. Reduced traffic speeds and vehicular City Council and other stakeholders. Village. It recommended that it repre- The BDP Masterplan and Development impact. sented a major development opportunity Framework was published in February That Yorkshire Forward should use for the area. 2001 (Illustration to the left) based on Reduce crime and fear of crime. CPO powers to assemble strategic the work of a team including Jones Lang sites. LeSalle and Martin Stockley Associates. A network of strong pedestrian The Council and Yorkshire routes connecting Holbeck to the city That support should be provided to Forward subsequently commissioned a and the surrounding communities of industrial uses to help them to move series of studies to explore the imple- Holbeck and Beeston. to alternative sites. Plans and illustrations from Gillespie’s work on the public realm of area. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

PART 3: Masterplan Development Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

3a Reconnecting Holbeck Urban Village

In this section we describe the develop- At the moment the best that Hol- At the moment the best that to the south into Holbeck Moor. This ment of the masterplan for the Mar- beck Urban Village can aspire Holbeck Urban Village can aspire to is could greatly improve access by foot shall’s Mill site within the context of the to is to be a quiet urban back- to be a quiet urban backwater. This is and encourage pedestrians and cyclists urban village as a whole. We look first at water. This is not necessarily not necessarily a bad thing. Some of to use the routes through this area to get the way in which Holbeck Urban Village bad, some of the most beautiful the most beautiful districts of Paris and into Leeds City Centre. can be integrated into the wider area. districts of Paris and Berlin are Berlin are just such havens of tranquil- Pedestrian footfall alone will not This is then developed into a hierarchy just such havens of tranquillity. lity – Rock pools away from the rush be sufficient alone to enliven the urban of routes for the area and a set of princi- of the city streets. However an urban village and it will also be important to ples based on a ‘super block’ structure. village implies more than this – it sug- improve traffic access. Here the main These principles are then applied to the peared with only the occasional rem- gests a mix of uses, some ground floor proposal is the opening up of the Sweet masterplanning of Marshall’s Mill. nants of the former village high streets retail and café uses, a degree of life and Street bridge as a road access to the While it goes beyond the bounds visible on Holbeck Lane through the activity on the streets. Other than the ring road. This will have the effect of of this masterplan, one of the exercises industrial area that stands there today. traffic heading down Water Lane to the reducing the traffic intrusion on Water that we have undertaken has been to de- In a healthy urban area the former ring road this, in our analysis this is go- Lane and increasing the permeability of velop an understanding of how Holbeck villages of South Leeds would have ing to be difficult to achieve in Holbeck the wider area. In our view this could Urban Village can start to function more been engulfed by the expanding city and Urban Village. allow the development of a route via effectively as a village. As we describe become the centres for urban neigh- It is therefore important to im- Water Lane and Bridge Road to con- in the first part of this design statement, bourhoods as has happened in North prove the connectivity and permeability nect the city centre to Holbeck Moor. the area now referred to as Holbeck Leeds. This has happened to an extent in of the area. This is partly about the The key would be to populate this route Urban Village was originally a piece of Beeston Hill and Hunslet Moor. However number of connections to the surround- with frontage development in order to open land between Leeds and Holbeck Holbeck Moor has become isolated from ing area but it is also about the quality create a supervised, pedestrian friendly Village. Plan 1 illustrates the original the city and Holbeck itself has disap- of those connections. The greatest route. Plan 4 shows a series of routes pattern of settlements in the area and the peared. This is because the arteries that potential to improve connections in that have been improved in this way to roads that served them. connected the villages (the red line on this part of Leeds relates to pedestrian reconnect the neighbourhoods of inner Plan 2 shows the same area the plan) have been cut by the railways routes such as the viaduct project, the south Leeds. They would create network today and illustrates how this part of and the motorway. It is in this context route under the dark arches and the new of attractive pedestrian, cycle and even Leeds has been carved up by infrastruc- of isolated and, in Holbeck’s case, lost bridge over the Aire. We also believe vehicle routes into Leeds while avoiding ture isolating each of the former villages. urban villages that we must approach the that there is potential to make a new pe- the traffic-dominated areas around the Holbeck itself has almost entirely disap- task of creating Holbeck Urban Village. destrian connection across the railway motorway junction.

Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Base plan A structure of ‘Superblocks’ based on the A new framework of local streets creating a 1. 2. primary an secondary road system. The build- 3. permeable network of mainly pedestrian routes ings are to be higher around the edges of these through the area. blocks. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

3b Masterplanning structure

The above analysis of potential routes High Streets: High streets carry that Water Lane, Globe Road as well The lack of a strong network of per-blocks that represent the original linger and relax. in the Holbeck area has been used to much of the through traffic through as Sweet Street should develop over local streets in the Holbeck area plot structure of the area (Plan 2). inform a street hierarchy as illustrated an urban area and should be the time as high streets. reduces its permeability and has Active frontage commercial uses on the plans below. This is based on important streets in terms of build- the effect of creating very large These super blocks are created by such as shops and cafes should a simple street heirarchy based on the ings and uses such as shops and Secondary Streets: These are the blocks. the High Streets and Secondary generally front onto the primary/sec- following streets: public facilities. We are suggesting streets that carry local traffic into the streets ondary street network. However there area. They generally sustain more is the potential for some units on The local street network is used to create a more local facilities. We are suggesting The lack of a strong network of local The height of buildings should be the local street network (and double 4. fine-grained framework of blocks. These will be lower in scale on the local street network. These that Marshall Street and Bath Road streets in the Holbeck area reduces its built-up around the edge of these fronted units) to animate these more local streets will also create new public spaces. should be developed as secondary permeability and has the effect of creat- super blocks to create a robust urban intimate spaces. streets through the area. ing very large blocks. This happened environment on the primary and because of the super block structure secondary street network. The ground floor of the blocks on the Local Street: The other streets in that is described earlier in this docu- secondary street network should be the area are local streets that provide ment. The Marshall’s Mill site is part of An entirely new local street network predominantly live/work and com- access to individual buildings. These a super block that stretches from Water should be created that divides up the mercial space to animate the streets include most of the other streets in Lane to Union Place and from Bath Road super blocks into a series of develop- during the day. the in the area. However one of the to Marshall Street. Indeed Union Place ment plots and also creates a series problems with Holbeck is that the is partially a pedestrian route so that of intimate pedestrian friendly routes There should also be a number of network of local streets is very poorly the block could be said to extend as far through the area (Plan 3). We have courtyard routes, which cut through developed. south as Sweet Street. suggested how this network could be blocks. These should be gated at In preparing a masterplan for Mar- extended through the rest of the area night but will contribute another layer Courtyard routes: In certain urban shall’s Mills our aim has been to create a to link to the new Aire Bridge, The to the public realm during the daytime areas there is another set of routes new network of local streets to open up Dark Arches and adjacent areas. These are shown in blue on the plan. that pass through blocks. This can be the permeability of the area. However in seen at its most developed in Berlin doing this we also have sought to retain The building scale should drop at the These principles have been suggested as but is not alien to the English tradi- its ‘super-block’ structure which is part centre of the super blocks so that the a way of guiding and giving structure to tion where there is often a network of of its original character. This is described local street network has a different the overall Holbeck Urban Village area. alleys and ginnels that is overlaid on on the diagrams to the left and is based and more intimate character (Plan 4). More specifically they have shaped the the broader street network. As part of on the following principles: Marshall’s Mills masterplan as described the masterplan we have been keen to The local street network should on the following page. explore these routes in Holbeck. The masterplanning of the area include a range of small squares and should be based on a series of Su- public spaces that provide places to Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Right: The illustrative masterplan for the site. Above: The masterplan set within a potential wider framework Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Each of the views into the site is closed in the manner described in Gordon Cullen’s classic An illustration of the principle of a build- study of townscape. The deflection of the buildings; ‘arouses expectations that it is doing this The market square in Richmond ing in a square from Bacon for some purpose, that there is a place at the end of the street as yet unseen’ 3c Masterplan - Form

stands on Marshall Street with a lower Camillo Sitte-type square – with the views of West Yorkshire Archaeological The primary and secondary building at the corner of Marshall Street building playing the role of the medieval Service and English Heritage in drawing street network will generally allow and Bath Road and two smaller ancil- church standing within the space. No up a detailed scheme. The western part for a series of long views through lary buildings to the rear. The two rear changes are currently proposed in rela- of the site is set out with three blocks as the area. The local route struc- buildings are linked to a wall, which is tion to this building which is currently described below. These create two east/ ture will however create a series the original boundary of the site and is used as a training centre. However, it west routes into the site. It is proposed of much more enclosed views. partially listed. The starting point for the will be important to ensure that the Flax that the northern route be a courtyard The Marshall’s Mill masterplan is illus- masterplan has been to retain these built Warehouse plays an appropriate role route that is gated at night and there- trated by Plans on the following pages. structures as far as possible. We have within the overall scheme . The building, fore becomes private to that block. The This has been developed on the basis therefore created a new north south which appears to have originally been primary and secondary street network of the principles set out on the previous spine running through the site. This runs built almost as a brick fortress with few will generally allow for a series of long pages with the massing increasing at to the west of the wall in the northern window openings, has been altered in an views through the area. The local route the edge of the block on Marshall Street, part of the site and to the east of the wall unsympathetic way and its roof altered structure will however create a series of Bath Road, Water Lane and Union Place to the south. This is connected to a new and lowered to a flat roof structure. It much more enclosed views. Each of the and stepping down towards a new local route running to the North of Marshall’s is therefore intended to make a separate views into the site is therefore closed in street network that penetrates the site. Mills – which will put the mill entrance application in due course for a public use the manner of a medieval town. However This scheme is described in more detail onto a road frontage. on the ground floor such as a restaurant each view also leads the view on into below: At the intersection of these two or gallery with a potential additional the site drawing people in. The central routes we have created a new intimate storey in the form of a lightweigh glass square will therefore open up as people Design form public space – or inner court – while box. Any application submitted will pay walk into the site and from within the retaining the Flax Warehouse that stands attention to the historical importance square there will be limited views out. Marshall’s Mills is currently on a in this part of the site. This creates a of the building and take account of the This is the type of serial vision described triangular site. The main mill building by the urban designer Gordon Cullen in his book Townscape. This contrast of long views on the primary streets and serial vision within Right: The Flax Warehouse stands the super block is at the core of the within the central space (the Inner scheme concept and draws lessons from Court) like a medieval many European cities which also have church or market hall overlays of grand planning on the main Far Right: Views into the site are closed streets of an earlier medieval structure. and the buildings are angled to draw the Paris is a mixture of formality on the major streets and a viewer in. more ‘crumbly’ medieval structure on the minor streets. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

3d Masterplan - Blocks

Block Structure allow light and privacy even when the The blocks are based on a hybrid block form. The viaduct arches are developed. The inward In order to achieve this layout we have outer faces of the ‘super block’ have been double facing apartments have a privacy dis- engineered the urban blocks very care- loaded while the east/west blocks are dual aspect. tance accross the courtyard and are able fully. Much of the urban development out- to receive light because the block steps side city centres is designed as perimeter down towards the centre of the scheme. blocks. This involves dual-aspect houses The remainder of the blocks are and apartments around a secure inner ever for new-build schemes there can be the ground) the corridor block is therefore dual aspect and are accessed by balco- courtyard. It requires blocks that are at problems with corridor blocks. Because only marginally better than the perimeter nies on the internal face of the courtyard. least 40m deep in order to achieve an the apartments are single aspect, there block because of the space required This balcony is linked to the corridor of internal privacy distance. This means that is a need to provide space around the around the building. This also leads to a the double loaded apartments and is perimiter blocks are difficult to accom- block to achieve privacy, natural light and modernist, object oriented layout. accessed by cores that access both the modate on tight city centre sites. There solar gain. There is also the problem that On the Marshall’s Mill site the street and the courtyard. The aim is for is also a limit to the density at which some apartments end up with a single character of the local street network that the courtyard to become the main means this type of perimeter block can be built northern aspect. It is therefore necessary we are seeking to create is based on of access to the apartments. The block which is around 200 units per hectare. to space blocks 20-25m apart. This is streets that are, in some places, as nar- layout suggested by Bauman Llyons In city centres it is more com- fine on large city streets (The Briggate for row as 8m. This means that we cannot (opposite right) is based on similar prin- mon to develop flats as corridor blocks example is 20m wide). However it makes rely on this space alone to provide light ciples except that the east west blocks or ‘double loaded’ blocks. These involve it difficult to create residential accommo- and privacy to apartments. We have are designed as ‘sissor flats’ (shown in single-aspect apartments off a central dation onto narrow urban streets. therefore created a hybrid block form that blue). The east /west apartments could corridor and tend to be 20-25m deep. While double-loaded blocks are is part perimeter and part corridor block. also be designed as walk-up blocks with This is the way that many conversions of very efficient internally, in terms of While we are not seeking consent individual staircases serving each pair of warehouses have been undertaken. How- footprint (the coverage of the building on as part of the outline application for apartments. the internal arrangement of the blocks, These different forms have been URBED and Bauman Llyons Architects tested by the masterplanning team (see have explored in some detail how they photograph of the modelling options). can be realised as illustrated in the facing From this work we are confident that page. In these studies the outer faces there are a number of options for plan- of the ‘super block’ have been double ning the blocks in line with planning loaded while the east/west blocks are policies. This achieved net residential dual aspect. The double loaded blocks densities of between 250 and 330 units Right: The illustrative scheme are possible because they look out onto per hectare depending on the layout shows the blocks stepping down towards the inner court Bath Road where there is the width to chosen. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

3e Masterplan - Massing

The massing has been designed to maintain the bath road New block c with basement car park, mixed uses setting of of Marshall’s Mill. It has also been guided on ground floor and residential units at upper levels. by the ‘super block’ principle with higher buildings around the edge of the site and lower buildings in the The proposed height and massing of shapes. At one point we considered over the listed wall. The ground floor of Marshall Street. middle. the blocks within the masterplan is leaving the inner face of these blocks the scheme is proposed as commercial, illustrated on the plan to the right. The open and enclosing the inner court live/work accommodation and has a 6m Block C: This building is on the cen- colours on this plan relate to the illustra- space with the gables of the blocks. We ceiling height so that it can potentially tral part of the Bath Road. The block tive scheme (below) while the numbers were however concerned about the level accommodate a mezanine level. There rises to 7 storeys on Bath Road represent the flexibility sought as set out of enclosure and have therefore closed is a basement car park beheath blocks and then steps down into the site to in the Regulatory Plan. this face albeit with lower blocks, shown C and D but this does not project above 3 storeys fronting the inner court. The massing of the scheme has on the illustrative plan at 3 storeys. the ground level. This stepped building form creates been designed to maintain the setting The illustrative layout does how- The massing of the blocks is the opportunity of a series of roof of of Marshall’s Mill. It has also been ever maintain the notion of the gables of therefore as follows: gardens and balconies. guided by the ‘super block’ principle these buildings playing an important role with higher buildings around the edge in enclosing the central space. These Block A: These blocks are 4 storeys Block D: The block on the corner of the site and lower buildings in the gables project forward of the building high in order to mediate the differ- of Bath Road and Derwent Place is middle. The blocks are designd as ‘U’ line at first floor level in some cases ence between Marshall’s Mills and similar in form to Block C. This rises Marshall’s Court. to 8 storeys on this corner then step- ping down to 4 storeys adjacent to Block B: The hotel at the northern block E the east. end of the site rises and is main- tained at 2 storeys behind the Block E: This is to be a commercial retained facade of the Water Lane block so that the floor to ceiling Printing Works. Behind this the hotel heights will be greater than the resi- rises to six storeys. This is lower dential accommodation. The frontage than some of the blocks in the south- of this block benefits from an exist- ern part of the scheme despite this ing planning consent and we have being an important street frontage. kept the massing within the envelop We have been concerned to relate of this consent. The block therefore this block to the more domestic rises to five storeys at its highest scale of the Round Foundry frontage point along Union Place. and the new residential scheme that has been completed on the corner of

SECTION AA Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

3f. Masterplan - Townscape and Heritage

The masterplan area lies within the age issues. URBED’s approach to permeability through the scheme. enhance its appearance and sense The scheme requires applica- Holbeck Conservation area and Mar- masterplanning is based in part on a of importance at the heart of the tions for listed buildings consent shall’s Mill and Marshall Court are listed ‘rediscovery’ of a site’s history and We have used Block A to complete square. Whilst it is not a listed build- for the demolition of part of buildings. Most significantly for the this has guided our approach here. The the blocks created by Marshall’s Mill ing in its own right, it does lie within the wall and conservation area masterplan, the wall that runs through masterplan does this in the following and Marshall’s Court. The block fills the curtilage of the listed Marshall’s consent for the demolition of the the site from Bath Road to Derwent ways: the gap in the frontage onto Marshall Mill and hence a detailed planning Water Lane Printing Works. Place is listed for part of its length. The Street and creates a new local street and listed building application will be building in the centre of the site is also tive frontage. The site is also bounded We have retained two significant so that the entrance to Marshall’s submitted separately in due course. recognised in the SPG for the area as a by important heritage sites including sections of the wall running through Mill is on a street frontage. building of local importance and Water Temple Works to the south, the towers the site. The northern section We have retained the façade and roof Lane Printing Works, while of little herit- site to the North, the Round Foundry to – which is listed forms the boundary We have retained the Flax Warehouse of the Water Lane Printing Works. age importance, does have an attrac- the east and the listed railway viaduct to to the north/south public route that in the heart of the site as a feature in While this frontage has limited herit- the west. runs through the site. A southern the middle of our new square. This age importance it is an attractive, This application is accompanied section of the wall is incorporated is a plain but robust structure and well proportioned façade and will by a heritage statement prepared by into Block D. This is incorporated at present the planning application create a sense of continuity and his- Tom Hassall OBE, Archaeological and into the external wall of the ground retains it in its present use and form. tory to this important corner of the Heritage Management Consultant. It floor of the building and is used However, it will be important to en- scheme. requires applications for listed buildings to disguise the ramp to the under- sure that the building functions as an consent for the demolition of part of the ground car park. The illustrative plan integral part of the Masterplan given The scheme is also designed with wall and conservation area consent for suggests that the upper floors may its central location and discussions reference to the surrounding heritage the demolition of the Water Lane Printing oversail this wall. It is proposed to are taking place with the owners with buildings. The north/south route through Works. demolish a small part of the wall a view to opening up the ground floor the site is on the line of the original The masterplan seeks to deal to create the Inner Court Square. with a public use on the ground floor street through the site and has the sensitively with all of these herit- This is unavoidable inorder to create and a potential additional floor to potential to link to the surrounding sites. The Long-established footpath route through Union Place is also retained and

Right: The boundary wall running we have suggested that a new square through the site, part of which is be created in front of Marshall’s Mill and listed. The sections shown in red are those to be demolished. Temple works to provide a fitting setting for these buildings. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Tight courtyard block with internal gallery High density mixed use development in access, Borneo, Amsterdam Cafes trading into courtyards in Berlin Oxford (left) and Coin Street, London 3g. Proposed Uses

The scheme is designed to create a Blocks C and D: These blocks are Block A: This is proposed as work- dense, mixed-use quater that will gener- similar in form. They include 225 space buildings operated in a similar ate activity throughout the day as well units of residential accommodation way to Marshall’s Mill. It is proposed as being able to adapt to the market as on the upper floors. The ground floor that the planning consent allows for the Urban Village develops. The blocks of these blocks will will include a the use of the ground floor of these have been designed to maximise active range of uses to animate the public blocks for gallery space. ground floor uses. To this end there is realm. These include café/restaurant no residential accommodation at ground space fronting Bath Road, entrance Block B: This is to be a mixed use level which is made up of a combination lobbies into the courtyard for the block comprising of a total area of of workspace, live/work and retail/cafe housing above, workspace and live space. In developing these proposals we work units. To accommodate these considered where the ground floor retail/ There is no residential accom- uses the ground floor will have a 4m cafe space should be located. It was modation at ground level which ceiling height. The live/work units tempting to locate this in the heart of is made up of a combination of can be linked to the apartments the site and we have indeed suggested workspace, live/work and retail/ on the first floor. These units to- that there could be a cafe in the base of cafe space. gether with the workspace will have the Flax Warehouse. However the road entrances off the surrounding streets hierarchy suggests that the active uses and shop frontages for the display should be located around the edge of 10,645m2 incorporating the facade and potential sale of goods. We are the super block to benefit from passing of the Water Lane Printing Works. therefore seeking a flexible plan- Block Area Residential Workspace Hotel Active trade. We have therefore located the The block will incorporate a 125 bed ning consent on these ground floor *1. Uses cafe/restaurant uses on Bath Road in hotel and residential apartments on units that allows them to be used for Sq. m. Sq. m. Units Sq. m. Sq. m. Sq. m. anticipation of this developing as a lively the upper floors. The reception and workspace, retailing and café/bar Block A route as set out in the Holbeck Strate- use. 2,772 2,772 public facilities of the hotel will cre- Block B gies. These cafes have the potential to 10,645 3,544 44 648*2 5,806*3 647 ate active frontage onto the north/ Block C trade both into the street and the internal Block E: This is a commercial block *2 south route running through the site. 10,233 8,339 111 947 947 2 Block D courtyard. The uses of the blocks are The ground floor of the residential with 6058m of commercial space. 11,127 9,171 114 978*2 978 Block E therefore; block will be workspace, live/work on the upper floors. The ground floor 6,058 6,058 space. is to include reception and commu- TOTAL 40,835 21,054 269 11,403 5,806 2,572 nal facilities for the workspace.

Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

At the heart of the site is the In- ner Court, This is the focus for Public Realm the local routes through the area and is designed as an intimate space within the urban structure.

This is a resolutely urban scheme so Local routes: The local routes will it will be the main access to the realm provides a variety of spaces that the public realm is made up of a se- be a network of intimate, shared flats above. The upper floors will within the scheme. However we are ries of urban spaces that will accommo- surface streets that criss-cross be circled by a series of balconies aware that Holbeck Urban Village date urban life, as opposed to recreation the site. These will be spaces with giving access to the apartments. The also needs a more public space that play etc. There is a total of 4,838m2 of a very urban enclosure ratio. As ground floor will include seating and can act as a focus for the public life public realm within the site constituting described above, these spaces are planting and can also have a front- of the area. We believe that there is 23% of the site area. In addition to this also contained because the vistas age to the café/restaurant uses on potential for a public square on Mar- there is 2,238m2 of communal space along these routes are closed. These the ground floor. shall Street in front of the Marshall’s within the blocks that will be available routes vary in width and the height Mill and Temple Works. This lies for use by the residents of those blocks. of the enclosing buildings in order Roof gardens: The stepped form of outside the application site but we The public realm is made up of the fol- to create a variety of spaces and Blocks B-D would permit the crea- would support its creation as a set- lowing elements: character. The largest of the spaces tion of a series of ‘hanging gardens’. ting for these important listed build- created is in the crook of the listed depending on the design of the ings. The space could accommodate Inner court: At the heart of the wall. detailed schemes. a range of uses and would require site is the inner court as described the redevelopment of the blocks above. This is the focus for the Courtyard Routes: Two of the blocks Public square: The above public around this new square to create local routes through the area and is are bisected by courtyard routes. enclosure and enlivening activities. designed as an intimate space within These run between blocks B and C the urban structure. This is part of a and between Block E and Marshall’s predominantly pedestrian movement Mill. These routes will add to the network and creates a haven of calm permeability of the area during the where people can rest and linger, day but will be closed at night, thus associated with the public uses that becoming internal to the block. populate ground floor space around the square. The stepping down of the Courtyards: Within each of the buildings to this point will create a blocks is a courtyard. This will be more open feel to this space. an actively used space because Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

PART 4: Transport Strategy

Martin Stockley Associates

Westgate distributor.

Globe Road. Globe Road.

Sydenham Street. Key - Existing Strategy and alternative routes to the motorway after traffic calming on Globe Road

Public Transport Box Priority for buses, cycles and taxis. Nineveh Road.

City Centre Loop, one way. Top Moor Side. Inner Ring Road.

Alternative routes to the motorway

after traffic calming measures along Junction 2. Junction 2. Globe road. M621 M621 Site boundary M1 M1

1. Current Transport Strategy. 2. Alternative routes to the motorway after traffic calming measures along Globe Road.

Public Transport Box. Alternative routes to the motorway Priority for buses, cycles and taxis. after traffic calming measures along Globe road. City Centre Road Network

City Centre Loop, one way. Existing Strategy and Site boundary alternative routes to the motorway after Inner Ring Road. traffic calming measures along Globe Road. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

4a. The curent situation

As part of the masterplan development the various plans for the area become Local Movement very little has been done to enhance it ing through the area. Outside of peak access issues have been addressed established. or adjust it for reuse in the emerging times the lack of local movement and of by Martin Stockley Associates. In this The area is readily accessible by At present Holbeck is significantly regenerated Holbeck. Footpaths are any physical speed controls means that section we describe the conclusions of bicycle because of its proximity to the under-occupied and under-populated inadequate and poorly finished, lighting vehicle movement on Globe Road, in this work, the recommendations for the centre but the quality of available cycle and as a consequence there is very little is inadequate in places and the lack of particular is too fast and therefore repre- wider area and the proposed access routes leaves much to be desired. Sig- locally generated movement. What does population means that there is very little sents an unacceptable risk to people on arrangements for the scheme. nificant improvements are needed to the In terms of movement and exist is small pockets of activity as- natural surveillance. In addition, Globe foot and on bicycles. Marshall’s Mill is at the heart of local streets to make them more usable proximity Marshall’s Mill is ideally sociated with businesses in area. As a Road is currently sign-posted and used Holbeck Urban Village which is located for people on bicycles and on foot. suited to a scheme promoting result, quality of movement is generally as a main route to the motorway system

immediately to the south of Leeds Cen- Movement on foot to the City the use of public transport and very poor. to the South of Leeds. This means

2 1

0 2

7

1 Bank House

1 B 1 I

1 AC NF 0 K 8 ) 0 t 7 IR 1

o YO Clo th H all M

112 RK AR P 8 Y (M L (Bank) Bank

S

8 TR 6 E 5 Co urt ET

7 A BA 6 N CKYO RKPLACE E YOR KPLAC

29.3m E E U 3 T T

E GasGov E 6

Q ElSubSta The 2 W E E T E E ElSubSta

L R R E LIN PH 1 E G L T T R ON Central T ST STREE T S Regent House S E T T (PH) I G N L

32 C D 9 E Q I T N h M 30 a R BM N T

E p 32 i

E G A .32m l

B e E l 1 26 T 2 7 I 7 l R H BA 29.3m CK 6 N R

U T I A YO

i e RK B 4 N

N S l c PLA l 18 i CE 9 L 1 f Y

C f OR

A K I E O 9 L O PLAC h t E Q N E T a 16 s E

p o

N PH 29.3m

G A e P 1 2 l W 3 T 7 l 7 10 I 8 BA a CK r U

R e YO N 4 T

I c RK e T

B i PLA n 9

1 18 f CE e f 6 L G E GasGov

L O 4 Q E

t T Ho Q ElS 16 s tel ubSta 2 E St Martins E M e U The o trop E E E ElSubSta P E o le W

PH l B R E 10 E T E a L 1 W 7 BACK r LB C LI R R PH 8 YO e T S E N RK T G n 76 S PLACE R s E T L e E B O T T G 5 G E C P N Central 4 House 2 T T R A S T Ho Q N T S S

T tel I T R Regent House

M e U R E St Martins E trop E

o le E K S T

B K T E E 3 (PH) R C E 3 I S R T T Po L

reduced dependency on privateLB O N S 2 sts 76 RE Bs O G L 32 W 5 P E C W D G T T E 2 A House I 30 M N E T BM E R

I R T E R E 32 i

29.6m E .32m l E l K R

K E B B R 26

A H R A 29.3m T 3 R U 3 T U S i S S l L Po l

O W Q I N A

2 sts O S N areho C

use G I W 9 G W Y IN T O N h a K H E I Q N

T p T R C A

E E A

L e 1 E T 2 R Hotel L 29.6m B l E T G I 7 A L

R A T R

U I e B 4

T L c 9 W S Q S IN 1 18 fi areho S I N f use G L O Y G 62 IN T L 16 st K I H 72 C E o E A s PH P L B 10 l L s Hotel T C e BA a L T tu CK r T a quare Mall W 7 YO I CityS 8 RK e L t PLA n 64 S CE e tral Main Line Railway Station. Studies Centre is currently limited to routes un- 62 The existing public realm is a that at60 peak commuter times there are 4 Ho G T tel M e Q 72 3 E trop U St Martins o le E Bs E B s R E TC e C T atu S LB ST

S

64 St CitySquare Mall T 76 R s

30.8m W R E B

areh 5 G P ouse E ET TC 1 s House 2 A S E 60 3 N t I a T 3 R

t K

u

K

e

s

R

L S 3 Po O O

T 3

2 sts

R

30.8m Wareh W W ouse E

s E S E 1 t E R 3 a T T R t E B u E A e 52 TCBs 29.6m A Statue R U s

T S S Q W S I N 1 areho use G Y G IN T I H K C A Club 35.4m E L L

52 T L Statue Hotel T TCBs I L

1 Wellington House 62 72

Club 35.4m Bs

C es 9 2 T 31.7m atu 64 St CitySquare Mall Wellington House Works 60 38 3

S 9 2 T

31.7m BM 30.8m W R 31.89m arehouse E

s E S

t T

a Works 1 3 t

u 38 PH e

8

s Ro yal Ex change 2 BM31.89m W ELLING TO N STR 34 PH EET 52 Statue 32.3m House TCBs Ro yal Ex change 8 1

2 W ELLING TO Club 35.4m

N STREET 34

5 32.3m House 2

33.8m Wellington House 3 2

9 2

1

2 LEEDS 31.7m

5 2

9

33.8m 1 Works

3

2 38

1 2 LEEDS W ellesle y

7

1 BM31.89m 9

1 El Sub Sta PH

W Ro yal Ex change 8

Ho tel 2

W ellesle y O

7 1 R W K ELL S ING TO

R N S

I TREET 34

5 H 1 32.3m House El Sub Sta T Ho tel W O

R

K

S N R I

5 H 1

5 T O 2

33.8m

3 B 2

R O A LEEDS 1 N R L 2 Tanks T AN

H E

9 O Royal Mail 1 B E 33. R O A 8m

R L R Royal Mail House W ellesle y 7 vehicles. A 1 Tanks T N E N House H ElSubSta

Royal Mail 3 38. m 1 El Sub Sta W E Royal Mail House S Ho tel O R T R

K

House S

N R R

ElSubSta I

5 H 1

E 40 SM T S 1 E 41 T T

R N

9

SM 3 o E 40 PH t 4 O

E 41 47 3 B carried out on walking distances (see der the main railway viaduct or around remnant of Holbeck’s past uses and significant numbers of vehicles queu- R O A T R L 49 AN

Tanks T E

PH 9 H 3

o t 30.8m

4 3 47 3 Royal Mail 38. m Car Park E Royal Mail House 49 R N House ElSubSta

30.8m 31.1m Car Park S 1 31.1m T Q ueen's Ho tel AIR R

31.1m E STREET SM 5 3 E 40 31.1m E 41

Q ueen's Ho tel T

2

AIR 3

1

E STREET 3 5

3 32.3m PH 9

3

o t

47 4 3 4

2 49 2 3 FB

1

3 32.3m

30.8m 4

FB 2 Car Park D OA 31.1m L R AL EH HIT W 31.1m Q ueen's Ho tel

D AIRE STREE 5 OA SM 3 T L R AL H Y ITE

H A

W U

2 e 3

Q s

1 u 3 L 32.3m o L

SM h A

e G

r

H

a r

E i 4 Y f 2

T f

W i l

A n

H

U H FB e s

Q W o

u t o L Posts e h L l

e G

A r 5

a r

H i f

E f

W i

T n

l H SM

H o

W t e AD l O Posts L R AL 5 EH 29.9m HIT W SM

SM

0 3

29.9m Y

A

U

e

s

Q 6 2 u

L o

L

h G

e A

r r 0 3 a i H

S f

B c f E

a i

IS r W n b T l H ro H

O u H

g h o 6 2 P t W G e

A H l T o Posts E te B Sc S l 5 IS ar T H br R O ou E E (PH SM g h T ) PG A H

TE ot el 6 S T 29.9m R

E E (PH

T )

0 3

6

6 CarPark 2

B Sc IS ar Aireside H br O ou g h TCBs PG CarPark A H

T ot 1 E el S T Centre R walking contour plan) show that it is via Globe Road to the West. However, E ( Aireside E PH T )

TCBs 29.9m

1 7

Centre 6

29.9m 7 CarPark

9 BM30.73m Aireside

TCBs 1 9 BM30.73m Centre

29.9m

7 1

D NEWSTATION STREET A El SubSta

1 Tank RO D S BM30.73m A NEWSTATION STREET T 9 El SubSta T Leeds Station Tank RO O S G e n T i T Leeds Station L O e

G e p i 1 n nry i P so Cit y H L Ma ouse El ing D NEWSTATION STREET lop

e S A El SubSta p 2 i Tank O nry Warehouse SubStas R P so Cit y House Ma El ng S pi T

Slo T Leeds Station 2 CarPark Warehouse SubStas O G e n Y i L CarPark E e

L p 29.9m i

Y ry T n Cit y H P so ouse

El Ma

E e ing R 8 Air lop

er S

L Riv 29.9m 2

O Warehouse SubStas

T

ire 3 R 8 rA ive

R W CarPark

O Depot 3

Y

W

W

E

E

Depot L 29.9m

N

T W F B e

Air

E r

R Tank 8 e

Riv 9

N O

within easy reach of the station, of there are plans for a new footbridge F B Tank 3

W 9 Depot

W

To City Centre E

El Sub Sta N FB

4 Car Park Tank

29.0m 9 El Sub Sta 30.2m

4 Car Park 29.0m Leeds Central 30.2m

El Sub Sta

Existing 4 Car Park 29.0m 30.2m CarPark Existing CarPark

LTwr Railway Station 5

LTwr CarPark

5 Existing

hes Arc The

LTwr m 5 s rche 3 heA .8 T 31 29.0m BM 29.87m M 3m B .8 31 29.0m BM 29.87m M B 27.4m hes Arc The

27.4m 3m 31.1m .8 31 29.0m BM 29.87m existing bus routes and of routes to the across the River Aire and the canal into BM 31.1m

27.4m AD RO antry 31.1m L SG AD AL

O H S E C R antry Public Transport H SG T O L I S

B O L r H i d A g L

e

C S

C W

H L O

E H O T S S D B E

I O r A i d

H g L P e O C a try W L t R Gan O h S Vehicular Movement

L S

E L ntry A

Ga S

P S T C

E H

a H Tank E E

R

t O h T S T CarPark B I O S r i d E y H g L ntr e Ga L C S T L m I L E W

V O Tank E 3

R E 4 S

. E T CarPark N S 32 E P L Hilton Hotel L M I a m V B t 3 E Monk Bridge Pedeh strian and Cycle routes LTwr .4 N SGantry ntry 32 SGa T Hilton Hotel E E M Tank R B T CarPark Monk Bridge LTwr LTwr S SGantry E L

L I hes m V The Arc 3 E .4 N LTwr 32 M Hilton Hotel rches B LTwr The A Monk Bridge SGantry

Car Park LTwr

T E

E

R

T S hes E rc 32.3m L The A IL

V

Car Park E T E N

E El E R Crane L T T S IT

E L 32.3m L BM IL

V Sub Sta E e N dg Bri El E S Crane L T

IT

L 29.77m Car Park T E

BM E Sub Sta R

T e S ridg E SB L 32.3m IL

V

E 29.77m Monk Bridge Forge N E El Crane L T

CarPark IT W CarPark L O R BM To Station and T Sub Sta G I T dge P ri r B a S Monk Bridge Forge v i CarPark n W g CarPark O WrTk D 29.77m R o

T c city centre. the new development site on Whitehall, k G I T r P r a w v i T n g L D WrPt WrTk C o a Monk Bridge Forge c n k a CarPark W l CarPark O r B R LTwr a w s T i n I T T LTwr G P WrPt C r L a a SO v n VE i R E 27.1m n a CANAL WHARF IG l N STR g B EET WrTk D a LTwr o s c i 29.0m k LTwr n 32.0m r SO w CANAL WHARF VER EIG 27.1m T N STR . WrPt EET L C

a n

a 29.0m l 32.0m B R BM 29.45m LTwr a City Centre s i i n ve BM29.50m LTwr Sluice SOVE r K R E 27.1m G CANAL WHARF IGN S C TR 29.0m D r EET MilePost a

E R BM 29.45m 29.3m o v B i

c n

L k

g 29.0m iv BM29.50m Tow 32.0m e O ingPath

H

r Sluice K A G

C

D MilePost 29.0m r i

E a 29.3m o r

B v

c i

L k n e Tow g O ingPath R BM 29.45m H i BM29.50m Ai r ve

B K r r Sluice G

C e S MP D r Mooring Posts MilePost 29.0m a MPs E 29.3m o v

B i

c n

L k 1 Tow g 29.0m O ingPath Br A H S Mooring Posts MP MPs BM31.48m ir Lock Leeds and Liverpo ol Canal 29.3m e 29.0m 1 R The Embankment i v e r r BM31.48m A B i r MP Lock Leeds and Liverpo ol Canal 29.3m MooringPosts e S MPs Mooring Posts R i The Embankment v 1 e 29.0m r MPs A i r MooringPosts e MP BM31.48m Lock Leeds and Liverpo ol Canal 29.3m R The Embankment MPs i f v 15 e MP r Crane A MP i Moo r

ringPosts e

8 1 15f MPs Crane MP L e Lo e g 15 ck MP d 15 a

8 1 1 s a T 2 n ow 15f L d i MP e 1 Lock 30.8m ng Crane 5g 5a P e 1 a 6 Quayside House d th 1 12 FB

s L 8

i 1 an Tow ve Height, width and weight restrictions. d in r 30.8m g po L Lo P 6 28.7m e 5g 15 ck a 1 Quayside House 30.5m o 1 a th FB l e L d 1 iv Bus route, existing. 29.0m s T 2 er Pos a o p 16 ts n wi o 28.7m Ca 30.8m d ng 30.5m o G n P 6 Quayside House a New a 1 l L l Ce th FB O ntau rHo L 29.0m B use iv 1 P E e 6 osts R CANAL WHARF r Ca O po 28.7m G n N a ew C A 30.5m o LO l ent To wer Works l The Main Line Station provides giving direct access to the centre. In aurH D o B use Chy E CAN 29.0m Pos RO AL WHARF Ca 16 ts G n New A a Ce To wer Works L l ntau D Chy O rHo Pedestrian / cycle routes independent of use B

Works E CAN

1 AL WHAR 7 F 0

2 RO 18 A To wer Works

Works D Chy

1 7 0 18 2 n

io Vict oria B ridge Works

t 1 7 0

Monk Bridge Forge nc 2

n BM 30.15m Ju 18 o Vict oria B ridge 2 Height restriction.

ti 2m ty 4

Monk Bridge Forge c .2 i 2 un 30 C n BM 30.15m J s Vict oria B ridge

m 2 BM d Warehouse io

2 ty e 22 BM30.49m t 4 c

.2 i 2 29.0m e CarPark Monk Bridge Forge n 30 C L road network. u BM 30.15m J

M ds Warehouse m y 2 B 4 22 2 t 2 29.0m e BM30.49m .2 i Le CarPark 30 C M s CAMP FIELD B d Warehouse 29.0m e 22 CarPark BM30.49m HOLBECK Le

CAMP FIELD HOLBECK CAMP FIELD regular local, regional and national rail addition, studies have been carried out Site boundary HOLBECK Existing vehicular routes within the area. Pedestrian / cycle routes on roads. To City Centre Vehicular entrances into the Urban Village. connections. The station has recently to look at ways of improving pedestrian Trains to Manchester. Pedestrian / cycle entrace to the Urban Village. Site boundary undergone major improvements and routes to the station via Dark Arches. Height resStitreicbtoiounn.dary further works are planned to improve These improvements would be pedestrian access to the south, in very significant in establishing the value

particular to Holbeck. of Holbeck as a high quality area in

2 1 0 2 7

1 Bank House

B I 1 A 1 N 10 CK FI

7 R 1 ) 0 Y 8 M to O A

112 RK P Clo th H all RY M L 8 ( (Bank) Bank

8 ST

RE 5 6 E Co urt T A 7 N BA 6 CKYORK E PLACE YORK 29.3m E PLACE

U T T 3 GasGov E E

Q The ElSubSta 6 E E W 2 ElSubSta T E E

E LL R R IN PH 1 E G L T T R ON Central T ST STREE T S Regent House S T T E I (PH) G L N ID E 32 R E BM 30 M T 32 B E .32m i l 29.3m E 26 l U R H T N i S l

l

O A C I Q 9 h T N a

G N p

A e 1 T 2 7 l N I

R e

I 4 c

B 18 i 9 L 1 f L O E 16 st o PH l P W 7 10 a 8 BACKYO r RKPLA ne CE e 4 G Ho Q St Martins T tel M e U E trop o le EB E E R C LB S 76 T T S RE Bs

5 E C P House 2 G T T A

N

I R

K K 3 3 R

Po L O 2 sts O

W

W

E 29.6m T E R E R E A B R U A T W S Q S areho S I N use G Y G IN T K I H C E A L Hotel L T

L T I In previous discussions with bus which to live and work andL all efforts 62 72 s B s TC e atu quare Mall 64 St CityS A N 60 BA 7 CK 6 3 YO E RKPLA CE YOR 29.3m E KPLAC S E

T

30.8m Wareh R U T ouse E T 3 1 s S E 3 t GasGov a T E E

t Q

u ElS

e

The ubSta 6 E E

s W ElSubSta T E 2 L E

E LING R R E L PH T 1 O T R N Central T S T T TR S Regent House S 52 Statue TCBs S EET E T (PH) I 1 G N D L Club 35.4m RI E 32 E 30 B M T BM 29.3m E 32 .32m i E l Wellington House U 26 l R N H T

S i O l LEEDS LEEDS l

A

Q I C T 9

N h 9 2 G a N

31.7m p A

e 1 N T 2 I I 7 l

Works R

L e

B 4 c 9 1 18 i L f 38 E LEEDS LEEDS O 16 st PH o W 7 P BM 8 10 l 31.89m BACKYO ra RKPLA ne CE e LEEDS LEEDS 4 G PH Ho T 8 St Martins tel Q E M e U Warehouse 2 trop Ro yal Ex change o le E E B 1 76 LB R EC T ST Depot W ELL S ING TO House RE Bs

N STR 34 2 5 G ET TC P A

EET O N 1

I

32.3m House R 3 K

K 3 Warehouse

1 R

Po L O O 2 sts

Depot W W

29.6m E

E R T

O R

E B 1 5 2 Warehouse E A A R U

T S

1 S Q

33.8m W S I N 3 2 areho use G Depot Y G ElSubSta IN T

I H

K C A 1 2 Hotel LEEDS E

L L O

L 1 T

T

I L

9 1 62 ElSubSta 72

Bs

W ellesle y C es quare Mall 7 1 T tu CityS ta BRID 64 S EG 60

3 El Sub Sta ElSubSta 11 Ho tel W

O S

R T

30.8m R 1 W E K 3 areh S BR ouse ID s E G S R E t T

I a

t

u 5 H 1

e

T

s

11 C OURT BRID N EG TCBs Tank 52 Statue

O 11 1 B 15 R O A Club 35.4m COU R RT D L A T A O

Q C

Tanks N R T 9 G E D E N h Tank Wellington House RI B G a

N 30.2m H p

A

e 1 Royal Mail N T 2 I I 7 l

3 R e 3. L 4

E 8m B 18 ic

9

C L 1 f 9 Royal Mail House OURT E O 15 2 31.7m R 16 PH st operators it was established that they should be made to see that they are W Tank o Works 7 P House 8 l D 10 A N BA a O CK r R ElSubSta YO e G E RK n D PLACE RI e B 38

4 G 30.2m 1 St Martins T Ho Q S E tel M e U 15 tropo le E E B BM LB R T 76 EC 31.89m T S D T A S O R s R House E B 19 R G E G 5 P D E C 2 T T 8 RI A PH

B N 30.2m 2 I

R Ro yal Ex change

E SM K K 40 3 3 Tank E R

Po L

41 O W 2 sts O ELLING 27 W TO T W N STR 34 29.6m E EET T E R 32.3m House E R

E A B

R U A 9 19

T

3 S S

o

PH t W Q I N 4 areho S G 3 use Y G 47 IN T K I H C Hotel A E 21 MP195.25

L Tank L

T

L

T 5 49 I 27 2 L BAL

19 MPALCE

62 33.8m

3 30.8m 72 2

Bs 1

C es CitySquare Mall LEEDS 1 T 2

atu Tank 4 Car Park 64 St

27 6 60

9 3 21 MP195.25 1 2

31.1m S BALMPL

T ACE W ellesle y R 1 30.8m W 7 1 3 areh ouses E S E

t

a T 1

t

31.1m u MP195.25 e El Sub Sta EngineShed Q ueen's Ho tel 21 s

AIRE ST BALMPL Ho tel W

REE ACE O

T R 5

3 TCBs Chy Junction 6 1 52 K 1 Statue S

R I

1 5

H 1 Tk

T

2 3

4 Club 35.4m 1

1 3 32.3m N EngineShed Wellington House BM32.24m Tank

O 4

2 Chy ElSubSta 9 2 Junction 6 FB 1 31.7m R Works EngineShed B ElSubSta

Tk T O A

Tanks R L

9 A 4 1 N 38 H E

Chy Junction BM32.24m Royal Mail 6 1 BM31.89m Tank E 3 31.7m 38. m R 31.1m

Tk 8 Royal Mail House

PH 2 ElSubSta

AD 9 4 RO 1 Ro yal Ex change N House LL Sta HA BM32.24m W ElSub ElSubSta BM33.00m

ITE Tank ELLING TO BA H 1 LMW W N STREET 34 S ALK NINEVEHROAD

32.3m House T 37 ElSubSta SM 31.7m R ElSubSta 31.1m E

Y SM 5 A 2 E 40 U

e 33.8m

Q 3 s 2 BM33.00m T 41 u

L 31.7m BA

o LMW L 1 2 ALK NINEVE h LEEDS HROAD

A

e G 31.1m 37

r

H 9

a r

3 32.0m

i

o

E t

f 4 L 9 f 1 PH 3 CKSHIL 33.2m T STO W i l n 47 H

H BM33.00m

o W ellesle y W BA 7 t LMW 1

e ALK NINEVEHROAD 49 Posts 37 l El Sub Sta 5

Ho tel W 30.8m O Car Park SM R King'sArms Posts K S 32.0m

R L

I CKSHIL 5 1 STO 33.2m H

T 29.9m 31.1m N (PH) BM36.17m 32.0m L O 31.1m STOCKSHIL 33.2m Q ueen's Ho tel

R AIR Works

0

3 B E STREE 5 T O A Posts 3 T Tanks R L King'sArms AN

H Royal Mail E 36.3m

6

2 In 1

E g to

3 ra 3 2

3. 3 m 2

8m C

R o 1 Royal Mail House (PH) BM36.17m 3 u 32.3m r Posts House t B Sc King'sArms N

IS ar

H br ElSubSta 4 2 would be keen to explore new routes delivered. That said, in terms of move- 1 o O ug S HOLBECK P h Works G T FB 22 A H (PH) BM36.17m TE ot R el S T E 36.3m

R SM In 1 40 g to E ra 3

E ( m 2

E PH Works C 24 41 o T ) T u r lk

t llWa

Gaitske

9 D

3 A

o t O

4 R 36.3m 3 6 L

PH AL 33.2m In 1 HOLBECK H

g to 47 E

ra 3 22 IT 41 m 2 H

C

o W

u

r

t 49 SM 30.8m HOLBECK Car Park Y 24 A 22

lk U llWa 61 Gaitske Q

e L 71 CarPark s L u

A 31.1m 33.2m o

h G H e

E

r r

a i T 24 41

31.1m l f f

H i

Aireside lk Q ueen's Ho tel W n llWa

itske H Ga 49 AIR W

E STREET o t 5

TCBs 3 Posts e

33.2m l

1 5

41

61 2 3

1 Centre 3 32.3m 71 SM

PLEASANTSTREET

4 29.9m 2 81 FB 1

5

29.9m 3 5

61 7

71 49

0 AD 3 RO

LL

49 HA

ITE 6 H 2 W ET PLEASANTSTRE 81 SM 1 S 5 B c 3 a Y 5 IS rb A H ro U O ug 9 BM30.73m Q P h G 1 e L to ET s PLEASANTSTRE 10 L H 0 u A 81 A o o T t 5 h E e 5 H

e G l 7

1 E 5 r 5 S

a r

3 T T i l

5 f

f R H

W i

n E E (PH H W T )

Posts o t 28

e 51

l

5 6 NINE Weight an39 d width VEHGA RDENS SM MeynellHeights 1 to 10

29.9m 0 5 1 5

7 5

D CarPark 0 NEWSTATION STREET 3 1 to 28

10 A 0 51

5 NINE

El SubSta 5 Aireside

39 VEHGA 6 2 RDENS 7 Tank O 5 ElSubSta 91 R TCBs

B Sc

IS ar MeynellHeights

b 1

S 28 H r 51 o O ug T P h

NINE G Centre 39 VEHGA T RDENS A H Leeds Station TE ot el S T 7 O R 29.9m 6 E ( MeynellHeights E PH 9

G e T ) 37 6

n 7 i 6 L ElSubSta 91 e restriction. 24 p i PLEASANTPLACE nry P so CarPark a Cit y House ElSubSta 91 El M ng 7 pi 6 lo 9 S 6

Aireside 9 37

0 BM30.73m 2

2 TCBs

Warehouse SubStas 1 2 1

7 Centre 6

9 6 within Holbeck in response to the ment and proximity Marshall’s Mill is 2 37 23 24 29.9m 10

PLEASANTPLACE CarPark 7 69 7 W 2 ar 19 9 eh 2 ouse

Y

24 1 11

0 PLEASANTPLACE 2

E D 71 3 2

L 29.9m A 1 NEWSTATION STREET

El SubSta 27

9 2 23 T O 0 2 BM30.73m Tank R 10 14

e

R 8 ir S 69 E 2 A 1 PLEASANTTERRAC r 7 e W 2 iv T ar 19 9 R eh 2

ouse T 21 23 MeynellSquare O Leeds Station 12

10 O 11

10 1

3 69 G e 71 25 2 7 3

W 2 n ar 19 9

eouh 2 i W se 1

L

11 27 D NEWSTATION STREET e 2 14 Depot A p 71 3 El SubSta i O E 73 W Tank P PLEASANTTERRAC nry R so

S Ma Cit y House 21

E 27 MeynellSquare El ing T p S

lo T

14 12 S M 4

T AT T

H 10

2 EW

10 37.2m Leeds Station '

1 S

ST

N O 25 75

E R

PLEASANTTERRAC Warehouse EE 2

T FB G e SubStas

n

21 i .92m 17

Tank MeynellSquare BM37 12

L 12

9

e 10 1 p 2 25

i ry CarPark n 24 P so 73 Ma ng Cit y House PLEASANTMOUNT El pi Y Slo

E S 2 T 4

M AT W G T VIE a Warehouse H its To City Centre 10 37.2m AM EW SubStas L GR k ' IN e ll 73 75 S W ST

R 29.9m a lk

EE T 15

T LB

.92m 12

BM37 17 S

T 4 8 8 M 11

R

AT CarPark

T e

H 10 ir 37.2m 7 11 EW A ' r

75 S e

ST

Y iv

R R 11

EE

T 22

O E 24

.92m 12 37 17 PLEASANTMOUNT 15 BM 3

El Sub Sta L 29.9m 4 W

T

Car Park W G

a

VIE its

AM k

R 8 GR e ll 24 e IN

Air W

29.0m r Depot a lk e 15 30 PLEASANTMOUNT iv 0 1 R 2

O LB Leeds Central W 15 30.2m

3 8 G 11 W E

VIE a

AM its GR k

W e ll 11 IN W

a lk

11

15 To Holbeck D PH 22 O LB N MSTE

Depot ICS ACH

F TREE PPRO

15 B T A 15 8 W

11 Tank

11

11 y E

9 Surger

11 22

Existing N

15 30 0 F 2 B 1 LL E 26 N

EY Tank 15

M 11 9

SAN DLE Martin Stockley Associates 85 W E O AD D M 30 AR IN

0 HP T 2 1 DO PH INEVE MSTE 18 N

15 ICS ACH 14

TR O 1a

EE PPR 2 20 T A 15 2 12

y 11 24 20 CarPark Surger DO PH MSTE ICS ACH El Sub Sta

TREE PPRO

T A 15 4

LL 4 E 26 12 1 N 6

Car Park to EY M 1 16

11 El Sub Sta Trains to 11 y CONSULTING ENGINEERS

Surger 35.4m El 4 29.0m SA

Car Park DN

regeneration of the area. It would be ideally suited to a schemeR apromotingilway Station LE 30.2m 1 WO 85 E O residential esM tates. 22 AD D 29.0m HPAR IN T SubSta C LL VE LOS E 26 INE E N 30.2m N EY M 18 14

11 1a

2 20 2

SAN

LTwr DLE 5 1 W 12 85 E O 24 AD D M 20 HPAR IN VE T Existing NINE

18 14 Martin Stockley Associates

1a

2 20 2

4 12 Garage 1

6 12 to 16 24 1

20 35.4m El

22 1

4 12 SubSta C 1 LOS 6 E to 16 35.4m 1 El s MeynellWalk he 2 Arc 97 The 18a 22 CarPark CONSULTING ENGINEERS MINT SubSta C CarPark LOES South Yorkshire. m Factory 3 Garage .8 38.7m 31

29.0m 1 BM 29.87m M 5 1

B LTwr Garage 8 5 MeynellWalk LTwr Martin Stockley Associates

2 97 18a MINT

4 Existing 27.4m 2 StMatthew's

MeynellWalk 13 Factory Community SE DCLO 97 hes Holbeck O 18a Arc LEWO MINT The 38.7m SAND ElSubSta

31.1m 1 Centre Factory m

83 s CONSULTING ENGINEERS

he

. rc 4 Towers 13 1 8 A 38.7m 3 The S 16 N 29.0m E BM 29.87m RD M A G

1 B 18 m 1 SA 3 LNDE ES W 8 L OO A R D . H

StMatthew's 1 C RGEE

1 2 N

12

13 3 29.0m 34 to 27.4m 1 BM38.66m BM 29.87m Community M LOSE BM41.72m

Holbeck ODC 62 B LEWO SAND

D StMatthew's ElSubSta 2a 2

A 13 31.1m Centre O Community LOSE

Holbeck ODC 41.5m WO 4 Towers

R try NDLE 13 27.4m an Public Transport SA 16 G S SHAFT L S N ONLANE ElSubSta E RD A L G BM37.01m

A Centre 18 1

SA 18 ND 1

S LE

ES W C

4 L

H OO 9

13 Towers A R D H to C E H 31.1m G

16 RNEE

S 1

O N 12

T S E RD 12

B A 2 I D to G

34 O r BM41.72 1 BM38.66m

i 18 A m

H d 62 L g 1 SA e O ND 2 LB C LE ES W L OO A R R D W L H Club C G 1

O REE try 2a

1 L N Gan

12 S 5 a

L 5 S

3 E to 34 A BM41.72m 1 BM38.66m

62 H 41.5m

P S E C 26

JENKI 2 H NSO a T NLA I O SHAFT 37.2m WN t 2a S ONLANE DOMESTICSTREET B

h H O r D BM37.01m i d

L Club g

e A

W C

41.5m L 18 y 1

ntr O O Ga 9

S T

S R to E E Vehicular Movement Tank E SHAFOTNLANE P antry

R L

G 1

12 S 4 a BM37.01m a 2 T CarPark t L

S h A

E 18

2 1 4 LB Spotted

L H

S E

L Club S to E C LO I y 1

m Gantr C

V S T appropriate to have further discussions the use of public transport and reduced H

T

3 E

a Tank 5

E

O 12 3 5 I E 2 S Cow 4 R . N B

H O T CarPark r 2 S i d N

g L TCBs S O

3 2

E N LB JE 26 e KI W C N L NKI Hilton Hotel m NSO JE L N (PH) I Club L M 1 3 37.2m LA V STREET WN

4 DOMESTIC O

B . E Gaitskell a

5 S 3 5 2 N Club Monk Bridge LTwr 3 E SGantry P M Hilton Hotel a

B JENKI 26 t Monk Bridge NSNO Pedestrian and Cycle routes BM35.15m h STREET 37.2m LAWN LTwr Grange DOMESTIC SGantry 1

a LTwr Club 4 ntry

Tank SGa T Spotted E

LTwr E E

S 61 LO R

C El rches T CarPark S e A 1 Th a hes

4 rc

The A Cow E M to OR L VIE m L W N I TCBs S O N V Spotted 3 1 2 KI SubSta

N 1 1 35.7m

E JE E

S (PH) 4 LO . C

32 Gaitskell N 1 Cow M Hilton Hotel

N 6 B 8 S O TCBs N KI

Monk Bridge S

N 2

HA JE F 1 Car Park 1 (PH) LTwr T 1 BM35.15m ON Works T

Grange ST E

SGantry R

E EE Car Park Gaitskell T R T E T S

E 32.3m E L R

IL T S V

E LTwr El El N E L 61

32.3m BM35.15m 1 E 6 IL Grange Crane L El T V

IT

E BM L

N Sub Sta M hes El to OR e Arc Library Sub E V Th Crane L e WIE T ridg

B 2

IT 1 S 1 35.7m SubSta 1 L 61

29.77m 1 1 2 El 1 BM 1 Sub Sta Sta

M dge to OR Bri VIE S W 6

8

2 1 1 SubSta S 1 35.7m HA 2

Monk Bridge Forge F 1 1

T 1

29.77m ON 1 Works

ST

R

EE

CarPark T Car Park CarPark W

O 3

R T To Station and E T E

6 G I T 8 R P r a T

S 2 El S

HA 1 1 v i F 1 32.3m n

T HO E Works 1 LBEC ON L g 6 KMOOR ST D IL ROA R WrTk D Monk Bridge Forge EE V o

T r c E k CarPark El N W w Library CarPark Sub E O T L R Crane T

El L IT T WrPt BM L

G I T C 1

6 Sub Sta P a r n 1 a 1 2

a 1

l C v Sta R i B e O

dg SB n a LTwr ri Y

B T g Library s Sub i S ER D n R LTwr AC C

E R WrTk 29.77m O o SB

Y c SO PL k VE A R E 27.1m C CANAL WHARF IGN S E r 1 TR

1 2 EET Tw 1 32.0m Sta 29.0m

3

L WrPt C 34.1m 8

a . Monk Bridge Forge 5 n PH a l HOLBEC B KM CarPark OOR W LTwr a R BM 29.45m ROA CarPark City Centre D O s i i R to n 3 v LTwr e BM29.50m T I T G r Sluice P r SO K a

G 0 61 VE 1 v

C CANAL WHARF R E 27.1m 4 i IG 29.0m D r 2 N S HO a n LBEC E MilePost TR 2 o v

KM 3 g

B 29.3m EET OOR i

c n ROA 0

L k D D 2 g

WrTk 1

o 9

C O Tow ingPa 2 R 29.0m 2 th c O r 2 H k SB 32.0m 1 A Y

T

ER w i R C

AC R

r E O T SB e Y PL A L C Key - Bus routes KeyE - Pedestrians and cyclists WrPt Key - Vehicle movement C

a C n

R

O r a SB l

Y C DayCentre

T B R B

ER O BM 29.45m R a SB R AC C S LTwr Y C E R 34.1m R R s O MP O O i

AD SB SB MPs Mooring Posts n

Y Y

i 8

V PL

BM29.50m 5 LTwr

IEW v A PH C 1 CROSBYSTREET e E 29.0m Sluice SOVER E r K CANAL WHARF IGN S 27.1m G TR C to EET 29.0m D MilePost r 29.0m E a BM31.48m 29.3m o B v 34.1m 32.0m Gaitskell c i Lock

L k n 8 Leeds and Liverpo ol Canal 29.3m

with the operators at a later stage as dependency on private vehicles. PH 5 The Embankment

g 61

R 0 Tow 4 1

O ingPa i 2 1 th v

2

H e 7

3

r 5 0 A A 2 7

i 1 r 2 9 Moo e 2 i 2

ringP 2 Court

1 osts 1 r 1

e R BM 29.45m 1

2 2 2

61 2 4 1 0

MPs 3 2

1 i 6

4 2

2 v

2 BM29.50m

3 e 39.3m

0 2

MP Sluice 2

1 r 1

2 9

K

2 G r 2

1

C DayCentre C D r B R 29.0m a

O

E MilePost

SB o v

Y C

f B 29.3m i MP 15 R R 1 S c n 3 Mooring Posts O O L k MPs AD SB MP g Crane Y

V

IEW Tow CROSBYSTREET O ingPath

29.0m 1 A H 8 DayCentre 1 ir 33.8m C

R O L e

SB C

Y R e

R O

O SB 1 Lo AD Y e g 5 ck Gaitskell BM31.48m V 5 a IEW d 1

CROSBYSTREET s

Lock Leeds and Liverpo ol Canal 29.3m 12 RUNSWICK 1 r

a T 7

R The Embankment n ow 5 B i i 7

v 30.8m d ng S e 4

P Quayside House AVENUE 5 r a MP B

ER 2 Court MPs

t 6 Mooring Posts TR A h Gaitskell 1 1 A

1 1

ND L FB S

i T 2 2

RE

2 r 4 i 1 1 E T

2 2 29.0m Moo e v ringP 6 3 osts e 2

7 r

5 p 39.3m

o 2 3

1 o 5

MPs 30.5m l 28.7m 2 Court

1 1 BM31.48m T

1 O

P

M

2 2 Lock 29.3m

29.0m O

2 4 1 1 Leeds and Liverpo ol Canal

O 2 2 P 3 The Embankment

os R 6 3 ts SID MP 2 C 16 R E i 39.3m G a v e 2 na New C r

1 LO l ent au A rHo 5 B us i e Moo r

15f E 33.8m ringPosts e MP 6 1 CAN 1 Crane 3 RO AL WHARF

2 A MPs 1

D To wer Works RUNSWICK 5

8 Chy

1 33.8m MP 4

AVENUE B 5

L ER 0 TR 2

A Lo ND 1 e 9

1 S ck T g 0 5 RE f e 5 a E T 15 3 1 Pedestrian / cycle routes independent of 2 6 RUNSWICK Works 9 1

d 1 MP 5

1 Crane

1 7 0

s 2 2 4 3 3

3 SM

3 4

a T 1 5 AVENUE B 5 8 o ER HolbeckMoor

n TR w 8 A

ND T i 1 S Height, width and weight restrictions. d O n T 30.8m P

g RE M

E T O P O

6 Quayside House L R a SID t 1 e E h FB Lo L n e 5g 15 ck 1 a

3 d iv 5 io s e Vict oria B ridge 12 BuT s route, existing. t

r O T P c a RUNSWICKSTREET M 1 o p O n w O Monk Bridge Forge o R n i SID d n RUNSWIC

30.5m o 28.7m E BM 30.15m Ju 30.8m g P K 2 a

l 1 t Quayside House 5 m h 6 2 y 1

it L FB STREET

2 4

29.0m P 0. 2 iv os 1 C 16 ts 3 er C 0

M s 2 p

G a 1 o Warehouse 9 3

n N B d 1

1 0

a ew 22 30.5m o 28.7m 0 5 3

C e 5

L l e CarPark 2 9 6 5 nt 29.0m BM30.49m l 2 O 1 1 aurH e 5 B ous L e 3 4 3 3 road network. SM E 29.0m P CANAL WHARF osts R 0 HolbeckMoor 1 2 6 1 C

9

O a 9 G 4 0 N

3 na ew C

A 2 6 L e 9 1 1 l 3 nt 3 To wer Works 5 O aurH 2 D ous Chy 3 4 e

3 3 B

SM CAMP FIELD E 14

7 HolbeckMoor R CAN 2 26 BusHOLBECK route (existing) O Pedestrian/cycle routes independent of road networkAL WHARF Height, width and weight restrictions RUNSWICKSTREET A RUNSWICK D To wer Works

Works Chy Playground

1 32 7 0 2 STREET RUNSWICKSTREET RUNSWICKTERRACE 28

18 RUNSWICK

3

1 Works

0 th

5 Pa

1 5 2 7 0

STREET 18 2

1

3

Height restriction. 1

n 3

1 9

5 0 2

4

o Vict oria B ridge 5

5

i 2 2 3

ct 3

Monk Bridge Forge 14 n RUNSWICK 7 n 2 o 26 i Vict oria B ridge

u 9 621

BM 30.15m J 4 t 2 M

2 c

2 Monk Bridge Forge PLACE 3 m y 3 n 14

2 t Playground

4 14 u

.2 i 2 BM 30.15m J 26 7 2 0 2 3 C 26 m 32 y

2 RUNSWICKTERRACE t

2 i 4 M s . 2 B d 22 Warehouse 30 28 C e BM30.49m Playground 29.0m e CarPark M s Path

32 B d Warehouse RUNSWICKPLACE

1 L e 22 3 RUNSWICKTERRACE 29.0m CarPark BM30.49m

28 e

7 L 2 3

th 1 5 Pa 2

RUNSWICK

3 CAMP FIELD 1

M621 5 2 2 CAMP FIELD HOLBECK PLACE 14 RUNSWICK HOLBECK 26

M621 PLACE 2

RUNSWICKPLACE 1 3 Existing vehicular routes within the area. 7

2 Pedestrian / cycle routes on roads.

1 40.8m

3 1

5 32 2 Gantry SiteSiteboun dboundaryary 28 Pedestrian/cycle routes on roads Existing vehicular routes within the area

To City Centre Pedestrian / cycle entrace to the Vehicular entrances into the Urban Village. UrbaPedestrian/cyclen Village. entrance to the urban village Vehicular entrances to the urban village Trains to Manchester. Site bSiteoundary boundary SiSitete bou nboundarydary

Height restriction.

LEEDS LEEDS

Warehouse 1

Depot

O 1

ElSubSta

BRID EG

11

C OURT Tank

15

D A O R G E D RI 30.2m B

19

Tank 27

21 MP195.25 BAL MPALCE

1

EngineShed

Chy Junction 6 1

Tk 9

4 1

BM32.24m Tank

ElSubSta ElSubSta

31.7m 31.1m

BM33.00m BA

LMWALK NINEVEHROAD 37

32.0m STOCKSHILL 33.2m

Posts King'sArms

(PH) BM36.17m

Works

36.3m

In 1

g to

ra 3

m 2

C

o

u

r

t

HOLBECK 22

24 llWalk Gaitske 33.2m

41 LEEDS LEEDS

61 71 49

Warehouse 1 ET PLEASANTSTRE 81 Depot

1 5

3

5 O 1

ElSubSta

1 to 10 0

5 5

7 5

28

51 NINE 39 VEHGARDENS BR IDG MeynellHeights E

11

ElSubSta 91

C OURT Tank

7 6

9 37 6 15

D A O R G E D 24 RI 30.2m B

LEEDS LEEDS PLEASANTPLACE

0 2

2 1 2 23 10

69 7 19 W 2 ar 19 9 eh 2 ouse Warehouse 11 Tank 1 71 3 27

Depot

27

O 14 1 PLEASANTTERRACE 21 MP195.25

21 MeynellSquare BAL

12 MPALCE

10

1

2 25 1 4

ElSubSta 73 2

S

T 4

M AT EngineShed T 37.2m H 10 EW

'

75 S

ST

R

EE

T

.92m 12

BM37 17 Chy

BR Junction 6 ID 1 EG

Tk 24

4 11 PLEASANTMOUNT 1

BM32.24m Tank G W a VIE its AM k GR e ll IN W a lk ElSubSta

LB 15

ElSubSta

8

11

C 11 OU 11 To Holbeck RT

Tank 22 31.7m

15 31.1m

15 30 BM33.00m 0

2 1 BA

LMWALK NINEVE

15 HROAD D 37 A O R G E D RI 30.2m B D PH MOE ST H ICS AC TR PPRO

TEE A 15 y 11 Surger

32.0m LL L E 26 CKSHIL 33.2m N EY STO M 11

SA DN

WLE 85 re1 sidE entiaO l estates. AD D M HPAR IN 19 INEVE T

18 14 N

1a

2 20 2 12 Posts Tank 24 20 King'sArms

27 6

4 12

1

6 to 16 (PH) BM36.17m 35.4m 1 El

22 MP195.25 SubSta C Works 21 LOES BAL MPALCE 36.3m

In 1

g to

1 ra 3

m 2

C

o

u

r

t Garage HOLBECK

22 1

MeynellWalk Martin Stockley Associates EngineShed 24 2 18a 97 llWalk MINT Gaitske

Chy 33.2m

Junction Factory 6 1

38.7m 41

Tk

9 1 4

1 CONSULTING ENGINEERS BM32.24m Tank 8 61 71 ElSubSta

ElSubSta StMatthew's 2

13 Community LOSE 49 ODC Holbeck LEWO SAND 31.7m ElSubSta Centre

31.1m

4 Towers 13

S 16 N ET E PLEASANTSTRE RD A 81

BM33.00m 18 G

BA 1 5 LMW 1

ALK NINEVE SA 3

HROAD LNDE 5 37 ES W L OO A R D H C G

RNEE 1

12 34 to

BM41.72m 1 BM38.66m 62

2a

41.5m

SHAFOTNLANE 32.0m BM37.01m STOCKSHILL 33.2m

1 18

1 to

10

0 9 to 5 5

7

5

12 2

2 LB

28 Club 51 1 Weight and width

NINE

39 VEHGA a 5 RDENS

3

King'sArms Posts 5 JENKI 26 NSNO MeynellHeights DOMESTICSTREET 37.2m LAWN (PH) BM36.17m Club

1

Works a 4

Spotted

E

S 91 LO ElSubSta

36.3m C

In 1

g to Cow

ra 3

m 2

C

o

u N S O r TCBs N t KI N (PH) JE Gaitskell

7 6

HOLBECK 9 6 22 37 BM35.15m Grange restriction. 24

24 llWalk 61 Gaitske El PLEASANTPLACE

M to O OVR

33.2m WIE 2

1 1 35.7m SubSta 1

41 1

0 2

6

8

2

S 1

HA 2 F 1 1

T 1 ON Works

ST

R

EE

T 2 23

61 71 10

El 69 7

2 1

6 W ar 19 9 eh 2 ouse

Library Sub 11 49 71

1 3 1 2

1 Sta 27

14 ET E PLEASANTSTRE 81 3 PLEASANTTERRAC

1 5 21 3 MeynellSquare 5 HOLBEC 12

KMOOR

ROAD

10

1 2 25

C R 2

O

SB

Y

T

ER

R C

AC R

E O

SB

Y

PL A 73 C

E

S

T 34.1m M 4 AT

T

H 10 8 1 EW 5 37.2m to PH '

10 S 0 75 ST

R

EE 5 T 5

7

5 to .92m 17 BM37 12

61

0 4 1

2

28 2

3

51

0 2

1

2 9 NINE 24

2 39 VEHGA RDENS 2 1 PLEASANTMOUNT MeynellHeights

W G VIE a AM its DayCentre GR k C IN e ll R W

O

SB a lk

Y C

R R O O 15

AD SB

Y

V

IEW LB

CROSBYSTREET

8 11

11

Gaitskell 11 22

ElSubSta 91 1

7 5 15 7

Court

2 1 1

1

2 2

2

4 1

2 2 6 3 2 39.3m

2 30

0 1 1 2

7

6 15

9 6

1 37 3

D PH MOE 33.8m STIC H TRS OAC TEE APPR 15

24 RUNSWICK y 11

PLEASANTPLACE Surger 4

AVENUE B 5 ER

TR

A

ND

S

T RE LL E T E 26 N

EY

M 11

0 2 3

5 SAN Martin Stockley Associates D WLE

T 85 O

O O

P E

M AD D M

O IN 2 1 AR O HP

R T SID VE E INE

18 14 N

1a

2 20 23 2 10

12 1 24 20 69 7 W 2

ar 9 1

19 5 eh 2

ouse

4 12 1

11 6

to 0 1

2 16 CONSULTING ENGINEERS

1

9 35.4m El 0

71 3 2

3 9 6

1 1

5 3 4

3 3 SM 22 SubSta C

HolbeckMoor LOES 27

14

PLEASANTTERRACE RUNSWICKSTREET

21 MeynellSquare RUNSWIC 12 K

Garage 10

1

2 25 STREET

3 1

1

0 5

5 2 MeynellWalk 73 2

9 97 4 18a

2 MINT 3

3 14

S

T 4 7 M 2 AT 26 T Factory 37.2m 7 H 10 EW

'

75 S

ST R 38.7m EE T Playground

.92m 12 17 37 1 BM 32 RUNSWICKTERRACE

28 8

Path

PLEASANTMOUNT 24

3 1

5 2

2 StMatthew's W G 13 VIE a AM its GR k IN e ll

W Community LOSE

a lk RUNSWIC DC 15 K Holbeck O LEWO SAND LB 621

2 M ElSubSta

8 PLACE

11 14 Centre

11 26

4 Towers

11 13 22 S 16 N E

RD

A

15 18 G 1 SA

LNDE

ES W

RUNSWICKPLACE L OO 1 3 A R D H C G

RNEE

1

12

7 2 34 to 30 1 BM38.66m

0 BM41.72

2 1 m 62

15 1 40.8m

3

1 2a

5 32 2 Gantry D PH 28 41.5m MOE STIC H TRS OAC SHAFT TEE APPR 15 ONLANE

BM37.01m

11 Trains to y

rger 18 Su 1

9

to

12 LL 2 E 26 N EY M

11 2 LB SAN Club

DLE 1

1 W

85 O 5 a

E 5 M AD D 3 HPAR IN VE T NINE

18 14 Martin Stockley Associates 26

1a JE

2 NKI 20 2 2 NSNO DOMESTICSTREET 37.2m LAWN 12

24 20 Club

4 12 1

1 4 a

6 to 16 35.4m 1 El

Spotted

E

S LO 22 CONSULTING ENGINEERS C SubSta C Cow LOES

N TCBs S O N South Yorkshire. KI N (PH) JE Gaitskell

BM35.15m

Garage Grange

61 El 4

M to O OVR MeynellWalk WIE

1 2 SubSta 1 1 35.7m

18a 97 MINT 1

6

8

Factory S

HA 2 F 1 1

T 1 ON Works

ST

38.7m R

EE

T 1

El

1 6

Library Sub

1

1 2 1

StMatthew's Sta 2 13

Community LOSE Holbeck ODC LEWO SAND ElSubSta

Centre 3

4 13 HO Towers LBECKM OORROA S 16 D N E RD A

18 G 1 SA LNDE ES W L OO A R D H C RGEE

N C

1 R 12 O

SB

Y

T to ER 34

R 1

BM41.72 BM38.66m AC C

m E R

O 62 SB

Y

PL

A

C

E 2a

34.1m

41.5m 8 PH 5 SHAFOTNLANE

BM37.01m to

18

1

4 0 61 1

4

2 to 2

3

0 2

1

9

2

12 2 2 2

1

2 LB

Club 1

a 5

3 5 DayCentre C

R

O

SB

Y C

R R

O O

AD SB

Y JE 26 V NKI IEW NSNO CROSBYSTREET DOMESTICSTREET 37.2m LAWN Club

Gaitskell

1

7

5

1

a 7 4

Court

2 1 1

Spotted 1

2 2

2

2 4 1

3 2

E 6

S 2 LO

C 39.3m 2 Cow 1

N S O TCBs N KI 1 N 3 (PH) JE Gaitskell 33.8m

BM35.15m

Grange RUNSWICK 4

AVENUE 5 B

ER

TR

A

ND

S 61 T

RE El E T

M 3 to O OVR 5 WIE

T

O 2 P 1 1 SubSta M 1 35.7m O O

R

SID

E 1 5

6

8

S 2 1 HA 1 1

F 1 T Works ON

ST

R 1

EE 5

T

El

0 2

1 1

9

6

0 3

2 6

9 1

1

5 4

Library 3 3 Sub 3 SM HolbeckMoor

1 1 2 1 Sta

RUNSWICKSTREET RUNSWICK

3 STREET HO

LBECKM

OORROA 3

D 1

0

5

5 2

9 4

C

R 3 O 3 2

SB

Y

T

ER

R 14 AC C

E R

O 7 SB 2

Y 26

PL

A

C

E

Playground 34.1m

8 32 PH 5 RUNSWICKTERRACE 28

Path

61

0 1

4

2

2

3 3

0 1

2

1 5 2 9 2

2

2

1

RUNSWICK 621 2 M DayCentre PLACE 14

C

R

O

SB C

Y R

R O 26

O SB

AD Y

V CROSBYSTREET IEW

Gaitskell

RUNSWICKPLACE

1 3

7

5

7 2

2 Court 1 1

1

2 2

2

4 1

2 2 6 3

2 39.3m 2

1

6 1 3 2

33.8m

RUNSWICK 4

AVENUE B 5 ER

TR

A

ND

S

T

RE

E T

3 5

T

O

P

M

O

O

R

SID

E

1

1

5

0 2

1

9

0 3

2 6

9 1 1

5 3 4 3 3 SM HolbeckMoor

RUNSWICKSTREET RUNSWICK

STREET

1

3 1

0 5

5 2

9 4

2 3

3 14

7 2 26

Playground 32 RUNSWICKTERRACE 28

Path

3 1

5 2

RUNSWICK

M621 PLACE 2 Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Key - Potential improvements to vehicular movement

Main vehicular routes within the urban village

Traffic calming measures such as speed cush- ions and tables to be introduced to improve routes for pedestrians and cyclists

Junction improvements to increase safety

Bridges and viaducts to be strengthened and opened up to improve access

Railway

Site boundary

Key - Potential improvements to existing pedestrian and cycle routes

Key - Pedestrians and cyclists Main pedestrian and cycle route Bus route Leeds Link, existing pedestrian and cycle link Access point to and from ped/cycle route along Junction improvements for bus priority railway line. Bus and Rail interchange to be improved Pedestrian and cycle priority in junction. New train statio to be considered Speed to be slowed down to create a pedes- trian and cycle friendly environment. Railway Railway. Site boundary Site boundary. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

4b. Access strategy

Once Globe Road has been re- At the heart of Leeds City Council’s is possible to treat all of the streets in street parking (short-stay) can be used Vehicles are allowed to move through This overall approach means that Hol- moved from the network routes aspirations for Holbeck lies the aim to Holbeck, which essentially constitute to support local businesses and also the area but must give way whenever beck becomes a very high quality public it is possible to treat all of the greatly improve the public realm and the the public realm in this area (since there to generate natural narrowing of routes necessary to other users. realm. This encourages use of the streets in Holbeck, which essen- overall environmental quality in the area. are no major parks or squares), as local for vehicles. At junctions, no priority is The Masterplan also allows for streets by people on foot and on bikes, tially constitute the public realm The Marshall’s Mill Masterplan is fully streets for the use of local residents, lo- given so that all vehicles must initially a high level connection from the resi- which in turn supports use of the readily in this area, as local streets for supportive of this approach. cal businesses and visitors to residents give way. All streets, however narrow, dential blocks to the adjacent viaduct available public transport. the use of local residents, busi- Fundamental to achieving this is and local businesses. The nature of this are available for two-way movement so in order to support the plan to create a nesses and visitors the reclassification of Globe Road as type of movement is that it does not that routes are slow but direct. park along the disused viaduct. a local area street and not a network need to be fast moving, and can there- Applied to Marshall’s Mill this route. Without this change the environ- fore be dealt with in a quite different means that the four streets forming the mental quality of Holbeck will remain way to the movement on faster, highly main block and all internal streets could poor in the area of Globe Road and regulated network roads. The Marshall’s become shared space (see plan top Water Lane and this will have a negative Mill Masterplan advocates a change to a left). Surfaces would be level (other impact on the regeneration of the area ‘Shared Space’ approach to the streets than falls for drainage) with no raised generally. The continuing use of Globe and Public Realm. kerbs to impede movement on foot, Road as a network route encourages Shared Space recognises that bikes, buggies etc. People not in vehi- use of private vehicles for commut- in local areas priority must be given to cles can walk safely on any part of the ers and undermines the use of Public the most vulnerable (people on foot and street as they always have priority. On Transport, both of which are contrary on bikes), that speeds must be below street parking is encouraged in particular to Central Government and Leeds City 20 mph, that surfaces can be shared areas to narrow the possible routes for Council Policy. (rather than providing separate zones vehicles. People on bikes can use all of Once Globe Road has been for the different uses), that all users will the street surface so they are not forced removed from the network routes it co-operate in the use of the space. On- into the highest risk area beside kerbs.

Left: High Quality shared surface in a tight urban layout - Temple Bar in Dublin Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

4c. Parking and servicing

The proposals for Holbeck aim to gener- term parking spaces are allowed for lo- by larger vehicles negotiating them. in which to pass. The system is regu- So the parking strategy for the ate a high-quality local neighbourhood cal businesses and that there is a provi- In conventional roads a delivery/ lated by individual good sense and civil area needs to be aimed at pro- close to a major regional city centre. Pri- sion of on-street, short term parking for collection vehicle parks on a carriage- behaviour rather than an imposed third viding car storage for residents mary uses in the area are residential and the use of visitors to those businesses. way and then crosses the footpath party regulation to which nobody feels and good short term parking for small to medium commercial uses. So Commuter parking is not provided to deliver/collect. This impedes both any empathy. local businesses. the parking strategy for the area needs for and is discouraged generally in the vehicle and pedestrian movements and Vehicle swept paths are easier to to be aimed at providing car storage for area. As businesses begin to develop in generates a cycle hazard. In shared achieve in smaller spaces because ve- residents and good short term parking sion of 70% parking spaces for resi- the area they will be required to produce space a delivery/collection vehicle can hicles are not required to remain within for local businesses. dents either beneath building footprints Green Travel Plans which are com- pull up very close to the delivery/col- a specific carriageway during manoeu- As noted above the Transport or in a nearby car park with designated plimentary to the overall approach in lection point and other movements still vring. strategy is aimed at making best use spaces. Holeck and in line with current industry have the whole remaining width of street of the very good and accessible pub- For local businesses it is recog- standards. lic transport available. An Electric Car nised that small businesses are individu- Pool is planned to enable residents to ally less robust than larger companies Service Access choose not to own a car and to use a but collectively more sustainable pool car for the limited but regular trips because changes in fortune of individual The shared space approach outlined for weekly shopping etc which are best small businesses have a very limited above allows very straightforward done in individual vehicles. This means effect on the area as a whole. So there servicing arrangements. All surfaces that the parking provision for residents needs to be an acknowledgement that are designed to accommodate vehicle is primarily storage of vehicles during small companies are dependent on key loading so access for deliveries, waste the day time mid-week with occasional individuals for their prosperity and good collection, removals, emergency serv- use at week-ends. This generates very mobility and easy access to their busi- ices are relatively unlimited. Movement low vehicle usage and is therefore not a ness premises is often critical to their speeds are generally slow and the lack problem in terms of local movement. success. At Marshall’s Mill therefore it is of speed humps avoids the unnecessary The Masterplan envisages provi- proposed that a certain number of long additional noise and disruption caused

An underground parking ramp emerging in a pedestrainised street in France Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

PART 5: Socially Responsible Investment

Socially Responsible These are based on the belief that The assessment process is used Investment (SRI) Igloo’s investments will perform better if throughout the development proc- they contribute to the regeneration of the ess, with the assessors highlighting Igloo is committed to a policy of Socially area they are in (and therefore benefit strengths, weaknesses, actions and Responsible Investment (SRI) that will from that regeneration), if they are envi- risks relating to a schemes perform- deliver long-term social, economic ronmentally sustainable (and therefore ance. and environmental benefits. In order ‘future-proofed’, against higher energy An abridged Stage 2 assessment to achieve this Igloo has developed an costs for example), and if they are well has been made of the schemes per- SRI policy which it uses to continually designed (and therefore more attractive formance in preparation for the outline assess the performance of its schemes. to occupiers). planning submission. This follows The SRI policy considers performance An assessment process is used an earlier Stage 1 assessment which against three themes: to establish a scheme’s performance. made a number of recommendations, This is a bespoke process in which including the establishment of a coher- Regeneration – engagement with schemes are scored based against ent masterplan and development of an stakeholders to invest in the regen- 21 criteria – 9 for each theme. Igloo energy strategy. The results of the Stage eration and renewal of the social, requires schemes to achieve at least a 2 assessment is available separately physical and economic fabric of ‘good practice’ score for the headline and is presented in the table to the left. urban neighbourhoods. SRI criteria. The policy differs from as- In summary, the results of the sessment methods such as BREEAM in Stage 2 assessment are encouraging, Environmental Sustainability – the three main respects: with the revised masterplan now deliver- ecological imperative to ensure that ing a ‘best practice’ performance. The resource use is compatible with It is specifically tailored for mixed- appointment of ESD to establish an en- the sustainability of environmental use ‘urban renaissance’ schemes, ergy strategy and initial work by Stock- systems. ley Associates has ensured ‘good prac- It is designed to encourage strategic tice’ for environmental sustainability, Urban Design – contributing to thinking, though the construction process now an urban renaissance through the needs addressing. The ‘market practice’ design of buildings and public realm It benchmarks performance against performance for regeneration requires that are distinctive, functional and best practice. further attention. The engagement proc- urban in character. ess and lettings policy are to be devel- oped further, with further exploration of the social and economic context. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

5a. Sustainable energy strategy

The development is subject to Igloo Re- 1. Design and construction of building as far as possible and/or advising on light and will facilitate extensive use of chilled water, and electricity will all be save around 200 tonnes of CO2 emis- generation’s policy for Socially Respon- fabric and building services. such. natural ventilation. generated on-site by a combination sions every year providing a major con- sible Investment as described above. Consideration will be given to en- of boilers, Combined Heat and Power tribution to the target described above. As part of this Igloo expects schemes 2. Use, operation and management of Providing guidance on efficient use ergy supplies from a community energy (CHP) units, absorption chillers and There is the potential for further to achieve a 70% reduction in CO2 buildings and building services. and operation of the buildings and scheme (see below), on-site renewable renewable energy devices. carbon savings with the inclusion of a emissions through development of an building services. energy technologies such as solar water Any shortfall of electricity will be carbon neutral fuel such as wood chips energy strategy. For each of the building 3. Selection and use of other energy heating, photovoltaics (solar electricity) imported either from a ‘green tariff’ pro- or biofuels. Biomass boilers and CHP types envisaged baselines relating to consuming equipment. The basic premise of the sustainable and wind power. Consideration will also vider or directly from off-site generation, systems are still an emerging technol- ‘good performance’ in 1995 have been energy strategy is to: be given to off-site renewable energy financed by the site but located in an ogy in the UK, despite the large number constructed and a target has been set The developer and project design team 1st minimise demand supplies. area with greater renewable resources. of installations throughout Scandinavia, at 70% of these levels. The table below have primary responsibility for item 2nd supply energy from low or zero This energy supply mix will Germany and Austria. Provision will be summarises these targets and sets an (1) design and construction, and the carbon sources Community Energy ensure that the site’s carbon footprint is made in the scheme for the future incor- overall aspiration for the development of ultimate owners and occupiers of the 3rd meet balance of demands from minimised through the effective use of poration of biomass once the reliability ~30kgCO2/m2. buildings will have primary responsibil- grid supplies The broad mix of land uses at the Mar- both local and regional resources. It is and commercial viability of the systems It is important to note that the ity for items (2) and (3). However the shall’s Mill site offers the potential for a estimated that gas-fired CHP alone will has increased. baselines and targets have been set on developer and design team will endeav- Energy demand will be minimised low carbon community energy system the expected composition of the devel- our to influence the ultimate owners and throughout by high standards of thermal providing all the site’s energy needs opment which may change or become occupiers by: performance and air-tightness, effective from a central source. further clarified over time and hence the use of natural light and ventilation where Residents, businesses and other baselines and targets may need to be Designing buildings that are easy to appropriate and by minimising service users of the site facilities will all ben- updated in the future. operate and control with systems power equirements and establishing efit from low energy and maintenance Achieving the proposed targets that ‘default to off’. leffective control and management sys- costs with increased security of supply. requires action on three main fronts: tems. The proposed layout and building Building safety and aesthetics will both Pre-installing low energy equipment form provide good access to natural be improved as it will not be necessary to route gas or individual boiler flues around the buildings. The main components of the Community Energy system will be a central energy centre, distribution networks serving each building and the conventional heating, cooling, and electrical systems within the buildings. Low temperature hot water, Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

Aerial view of the computer model indicating the shadow Aerial view of the computer model indicating the shadow pattern of existing structure on buildings and open pattern of the proposed development on existing buildings spaces for significant moments of the year. and open spaces for significant moments of the year. Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

5a. Daylight and overshadowing

WSP Environmental have been commis- before the development is marginally overshadow surrounding property or The scheme will not significantly sioned to advise on daylight, over- higher than the BRE acceptable shad- existing spaces. The general layout of overshadow surrounding prop- shadowing by the scheme on adjacent ing percentage. This is mainly caused the scheme ensures reasonable solar erty or existing spaces. The buildings and public open spaces. This by the existing Marshall’s Mill con- access to open spaces. There will be general layout of the scheme en- has been based on BRE guidance ‘Site verted warehouse. When the proposed some overshadowing of the inner court sures reasonable solar access Layout and Planning for Daylight and development is in place, the shading and the building courtyards. This is an to open spaces. Sunlight: a guide to good practice’. percentage is marginally increased, but inevitable result of the urban nature of This guidance has been approved by the shading ratio is higher than the BRE the scheme. To improve the scheme’s the ODPM and is widely used by local recommended shading ratio. Thus the performance some refinements have authorities to help determine planning overshadowing impact from the pro- been made including the stepping down applications. In this study, the Vertical posed development to this space is not of the blocks towards the central space,

Sky Component (VSC) of the adja- be reaching the surrounding properties. significant. the creation of gaps in the built structure Above: Plans identifying existing and new open spaces cent windows has been calculated to Open spaces, both new and In open spaces 2 and 3, although and consideration of the buildings front- before and after the proposed development. quantify the loss of light. This is defined existing will still benefit from adequate the shading percentage before the devel- ing these spaces. Below: Overshadowing study before and after the proposed development on 21st March. as the ratio of the direct sky illuminance solar access as a result of the proposed opment is lower than the BRE accept- falling on the outside of a window, to the Marshall’s Mill development, espe- able threshold the shading percentage simultaneous horizontal illuminance un- cially between March and September. with the development in place is higher der an unobstructed sky. The standard The BRE Guidance suggests that for than the BRE acceptable threshold. The CIE Overcast Sky is used and the ratio is an open space to appear adequately shading ratio is below the BRE recom- usually expressed as a percentage. The sunlit throughout the year no more than mended ratio, thus implying that the VSC on a window is a good measure of two-fifths (40%) and preferably no more proposed development will have some the amount of daylight entering it. The than a quarter (25%) of any garden or overshadowing impact to this space. maximum VSC value is close to 40% for amenity area should be prevented by In courtyards 1 and 2, the shad- a completely unobstructed vertical wall. buildings from receiving any sun at all ing percentage before and after the The Vertical Sky Component on 21 March. If as a result of new devel- proposed development is higher than calculation results indicate that the opment, an existing garden or amenity the recommended values. Similarly, the overall difference in the VSC of the low- area does not meet these guidelines, shading percentage in the new court- est windows in the adjacent buildings and the area which can receive some yards proposed as part of the develop- before and after the proposed develop- sun on 21 March is less than 0.8 times ment is below the recommended value. ment is marginal. Furthermore all the its former value, then the loss of sun- However, these spaces still benefit from values with the development in place are light is likely to be noticeable. adequate solar access for most of the more than 0.8 times the current values, The assessment indicates that the year. thus similar amount of sky light should shading percentage of the Open Space 1 The scheme will not significantly Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge G. However, when groups of buildings are being assessed, the wind effects can be cumulative (G). This cumulative increase in wind speed may be substantially reduced if existing or subsequent constructions nearby are of sufficient height to give a localised stepping-down effect.

5.6 Figure 7 below highlights the possible wind effects around the development resulting from the interaction of the different parameters that influence wind behaviour around buildings. The scale of these effects may or may not have adverse affects on pedestrian level comfort and safety.

0 - NORTH 350 600 10 340 20 330 30 500 LEGEND 320 40 310 400 50

300 60 Prevailing wind 300 290 200 70 Streetscape within 280 100 80 WEST - 270 0 90 - EAST the development 260 100 Courtyards within 250 110 240 120

the development 230 130 exexiissttiinngg ssttoonnee wwaalll ne 220 140 watterr llane e 210 150 existing facade retained ter Lane existing facade retained Wate 200 160 Possible wind effect 190 170 A 180 - SOUTH ee xx ii ss Wind Rose

tt

4 4 ii

nn c

c gg a

a r

r bb

p

p u

a u

a

c i

c i l

r l d

r

a d k a

k iin

r

i n

r

n

block - B i

block - B n g

g g

p

g

p

b

a

b

a a

a

r

y

r

y

k

s

k s

i

i

n

n

g

g

b

b

a

a

y

y

s s

e ennttrra annccee cc a ttoo ba arr ppa basseeme arrkkiinngg enntt

mm 4 4 ccaarr par aa Fparkkiinnggbbays rr ays ss h g h g a nin a i ll dld ll ili u ss u t b t b rr d e d Me a a BLOCK - B g e BLOCK - B g prpriivvaattee ccoouurrttyyaarrdd e o o t r nn t r ii t aa s t h s h yy ss t aa i BLOCK - A r t b i BLOCK - A r d b x da g x block - A s a g block - A s nin e b block - C i e b block - C aa kk h rr h aa oo pp aa priivatte ccourrttyarrd rr aa ll RR E cc ll 77 SS hh t tt t C rr aa ee ee BB tt 6 6 ccaarr ppark arkiinnggbbaayyss

eexxiissttiinngg bbuuiillddiinngg -- maarrsshhaallllmillill B aa ss dd F qq jj a u a u ss aa c D rr c ee ee nn block - D tt Marshall’sll’s MMiillll pp prpriivvaattee ccoouurrttyyaarrdd rr oo BLpriivOatteCK ccourrtt ya-rrdC pp oo ss ee dd pp uu bb l li E icc F c onnec tiing briidge tto viiaduc tt @@ ffourrtth fflloorr llevell C bayyss paarrkkiinnggba BLblocOCKk - F- E 66 ccaarr p block - F priivvaattee ccoourrttyyaarrdd

l l l l

C a E a

w w tt

cc e e e ce uu laac n l dd n pp o a o iai nn t o vv t iio s n s uun gg g nn g ii n ni tt i t BLOCK - D t s s s i block - E s i block - E i i

x x x x ee ee A priivatte Fccourrttyarrd

B

inngg paarrkki tccaarrp eennt seem bbaas ttoo nccee trraan eennt B A Downwash effect D Low and high building effect

B Corner effect E Stepping-up effect Above: Prevailing wind condition of the site at present C Funnelling or Channelling effect F Courtyard effect Right: Possible wind effects around the development Figure 7: highlight of possible wind effect around the development.

Wind Environment Desktop Assessment 13 Marshall’s Mill, Holbeck Village, Leeds 12081525-001 Marshall’s Mills Masterplan Design Statement A report by URBED with Bauman Lyons, Martin Stockley Associates and King Sturge

5b. Wind assessment

WSP Environmental has also examined effects of site location (open field, inner The Marshall’s Mill development over the top of the development. The Bath Road will remain suitable for stand- sitting. the likely pedestrian level wind environ- city, etc.) and the proposed buildings is most likely to generate long tight urban structure of the scheme is ing strolling and fast walking. The remaining areas such as ment around the proposed scheme and (height, geometry and proximity to other term beneficial effects on the upstream from the prevailing winds and The sharp-edged corners on Marshall Street, Water Lane and other its effect on pedestrian’s comfort and buildings). Tall buildings potentially local wind environment and it is is anticipated to be beneficial to the local some blocks could cause the wind flow internal streets should be suitable for safety. The Wind environment is defined deflect high-level winds towards ground not likely that areas of pedes- wind environment both downstream to5.4 separate,In thus accordan inducing cestrong with wind the Lawsonmost activities crite asr ia,the rest four of differentthe devel- pedestrian activity categories were level (known as the downwash effect) to and within the development. It is speed gradients. It is possible that the opment shelters them. In general terms as the wind flow experienced by people trian level discomfort will arise identified around the proposed building to assess the comfort levels resulting from local wind and the influence it has on their activi- so that windy conditions can occur near from the proposed scheme. possible that some funnelling occurs in corner on Flax Warehouse could gener- the Marshall’s Mill development is most ties. Structures have a significant impact tall buildings even on a relatively calm the streets exiting from Bath Road as ateconditions. an area of discomfortThese catego on its leewardries are likely just to indicative generate long of term the beneficial likely pedestrian activity, which means that on the wind environment at pedestrian day. The corner geometry, the funnel- a result of their length and funnelling side.pedestrians However it mayis anticipated engag thate in differenteffects activities on the local othwinde renvironment than those specified. The areas identified for ling and channelling of streets and the discomfort may be experienced but shape. However, it is anticipated that the turbulence will be infrequent and most and it is not likely that areas of pedes- level and the effect of the wind environ- the purpose of the study are illustrated in Figure 6: ment has taken increased importance stepping of buildings and courtyards mitigation can be avoided. A conserva- viaduct upstream to these streets may of the central area will be suitable for trian level discomfort will arise from the in the design of new developments. It is are other important factors to consider tive value of less than 5% is considered provide some shelter, thus reducing the proposed scheme. not always practical to design out all the as these may generate adverse wind acceptable. incoming wind speed. Also, the de- Identification� Categor of likely y C1 areas: Pedestrians are most pedestrian level impact existing stone wall conditions. The study looks also at the creasing building height as these streets ater lane risks associated with the wind. It is pos- Wind data has been used to as- w ter Lane on activities existing facade retained Wa likely to be ‘walking fast’ along the main and e x i s

t 4

orientation of building relative to the sess the local wind conditions. In the get narrower may drive the wind flow 4 i

sible at this stage of the design process n c

c g

a a r

r b p

p u

a a

c

c il r

r d

a a k

k in

r r i i

n

block - B n

g

g g

p p

b b

a

a secondary street edges (e.g. Marshall Street,

a a

r r y y

k k s

prevailing wind direction, the effect of absence of ready available wind data upwards, thus reducing wind speeds s i i

n

to identify areas of risk and anticipate n

g g

b b

a a

y y

s s

ent ranc c e to ar p base topography and the proposed outdoor at pedestrian level even further. These arkin ment possible mitigation measures. for Leeds, this was based on wind data g Water Lane and Bath Road). m 4 c ar p a arkingba r ays s h g n a i ll d ll il u s t pedestrian activity (sitting, standing, from the weather station in Sheffield streets will remain suitable for standing b r The method adopted for the study d Me aa BLOCK - B g private courtyard e o n t rr i a t s h � y s Category C2 areas: Pedestrians are most r tt a i BLOCK - A d b aa x block - A s g iin e b block - C a k h r a strolling and fast walking) because extracted from the TAS weather data- and strolling. o p a combines desktop assessment to pre- private courtyard r a l R c l 7 S h t t r a likely to be ‘strolling’ inside the development these are tolerant of different wind con- The open courtyards around step- e base (by EDSL). The prevailing winds e dict airflow patterns around the building, B t

6 car p arkingbays the use of wind data and recommended ditions. are from southwest blowing for 49.6% ping-up buildings could generate local existing building - marshall mill streets.

a s d q jj q a u s a rr c comfort and safety standards (the The scheme has been assessed of the year. The other relevant wind turbulence. However, the overall heights e block - D Marshall’s Mill BLOCK - C private courtyard � Category C3 areas: Pedestrians are most Lawson criteria). In the first instance an by the widely applied Lawson Criteria direction is from the northwest direction and areas suggest that the courtyards private courtyard likely to be ‘standing’, for some period of time, assessment of the baseline conditions which state the maximum velocity blowing for 18.7% of the year. will be relatively sheltered allowing for level ys arkingba BLOCK - E 6 c ar p block - F private courtyard

ll ll

of wind to which pedestrians can be all types of pedestrian activities. aa

was carried out followed by an assess- ww tt at the entrance of buildings (e.g. Hotel and c ee e u lac d nn p iia oo n v tt io ss n g u n gg ii nn tt ii exposed while undertaking different ac- The presence of the viaduct on BLOCK - D tt Impacts s s ii block - E ss ment of the wind environment of the site ii

x xx e ee private courtyard cafes). with the proposed development in place. tivities and still feel comfortable. These the windward side of block D could � Category C4 areas: Pedestrians are most criteria suggests that if the critical wind The proposed development is an generate an area of possible pedestrian rking a This takes account of local wind data carp ent em bas to ce ran identifying the frequency of occurrence speed for each activity is exceeded for average of five storeys, similar to the level wind turbulence on parts of Bath ent likely to be ‘sitting’, for some period of time, in of wind speed and direction that make more than 20% of the time then mitiga- surrounding area so that most of the Road. The eight storey building may LEGEND: the courtyards. particular locations potentially uncom- tion may be required. If the percent- incoming prevailing wind should flow generate higher wind speeds as a result C1: Fast walk C2: Strolling fortable or unsafe. It also includes the age lies between 10% and 20% some through the path of least resistance, i.e. of a possible downwash effect. However C3: Standing C4: Sitting Figure 6: Identification of likely pedestrian level activities in and around the development.

Effect of proposed buildings

5.5 There are a number of wind effects caused by the height and form of buildings. Based on research and wind tunnel experiments carried by others3 it is possible to anticipate in general terms the likely effect of building form on the wind environment at pedestrian level. Below is a list of the possible generic effects resulting from the proposed building forms and urban layout in this development:

A. The building height is an important factor, as tall buildings potentially deflect high-level winds towards ground level. This phenomenon is known as downwash effect (A), and windy conditions can occur near tall buildings even on a relatively calm day. Depending on wind direction the wind speed may increase by 20% for five storey buildings.

3 Design Guide for Wind, Wellington City Council, New Zealand.

Wind Environment Desktop Assessment 11 Marshall’s Mill, Holbeck Village, Leeds 12081525-001