Five minutes and counting until the Tribeca Pre-Determination Hearing begins! This is the part before the main committee meeting where we'll have the opportunity to put our case (along with other concerned groups and organisations) and the developers will put theirs. Strap in!
Just waiting for another few councillors to join, apparently...
Planning Officer summarising what happened at January meeting, when app was referred to Dept for Infrastructure.
Dept for Infrastructure decided the app didn't need to be referred to them for determination, despite objections and concerns.
Interesting presentation notes that Cultural space on the proposal = 695 sqm, as opposed to retail/restaurant/cafes at 10,000 sqm!
Principle of development, open space, parking, housing, regeneration - issues to be examined.
109 objections and *1* letter of support for the proposal since January 2020(!)
Interesting spelling of "Assembley" Square in the presentation(!)
Residential courtyards - *private* green space illustrated on presentation.
Extant permission from Oct 2012 important consideration for committee, even though plans and world have significantly changed since then and site has been through hands of several developers and not a brick has been laid...
Extant permission "remains live in perpetuity"...!
North Street Arcade, Braddells, Assembly Rooms - listed buildings. 13-29 North Street - facades retained. All demolitions for non-listed buildings have permission under extant permission.
Assembly Rooms - proposed to demolish 1950s extension. Proposed change of use to hotel and glazed extension. HED content in principle with change of use to hotel.
Braddells - 11 North Street - grade B1 listed - proposal includes partial demolition of partial extension. Approved as part of extant scheme. Revised scheme - less intervention. HED - complies with relevant planning, *subject to conditions*.
North Street Arcade - propose demolition of interior, retaining facades, building of new arcade. Extant scheme gave permission for internal demolition. End blocks no longer going to be retained. Structural survey - current poor state of Arcade - beyond repair??
Arcade in v poor state, vegetation, open to the elements (*due to arson!). Officers think proposed demolition is acceptable. Alignment of new arcade in revised scheme to connect two retained facades.
Conservation Officer - clear heritage benefits for the city to reconnect North Street and Donegall Street. Lot of use of the term "no greater demonstrable harm..."!
Officers think that redevelopment of Arcade is better than previous anchor store proposal - true.
Urban design issues - Gavin - 11 parameter plans, range of elements.
The land use parameter plan - range of uses across the site.
Design Code - rules for design for new development across the scheme. E.g. uses, layout, servicing, etc.
Seeking increased permeability across the site.
Removal of retail element has allowed for enriched streetscape and breaking up plots.
"Old and new can sit comfortably side by side" - not in this design, they don't!
Design code - appropriate palates of materials on a plot by plot basis. Range from stone cladding to type of steel used.
New "reimagined" Arcade. Much deliberation re: scale, form and alignment to reflect original Arcade.
Feedback taken on board re: previous tower, since removed.
15 storey residential tower(!)
Tall building, top 6-7 storeys open to surrounding views. (*Sticks out like sore thumb!)
Junction North Street and Rosemary Street - 10 storey office block. (*Which won't be needed in a post-Covid world.)
Writer's Square - "upgrade to provide enhanced setting for Cathedral" - pure developer propaganda here! The Cathedral are against it.
Writer's Square - "multi-functional space which can incorporate temporary events" - tiny ones...
Central Square - transitional (i.e. people would walk through it), but could incorporate public art installation (woo! That and slim building on North Street is pretty much it for arts and culture in this proposal.)
Assembly Square - telephone box will be retained. #priorities
North Street and Long Lane - two key connecting routes. Accommodate controlled vehicle access, but mainly pedestrianised.
"Decades of decay, neglect and lack of investment" - and that's what the future will be if this scheme is approved...
"Restitch this areas fragmented shape."
Ursula (Planning Officer) - open space - suggesting an 86% increase from extant proposal? Hmmmm...
"Open space proposals comply with planning policy."
10% affordable housing on site, 10% social housing *off site* - this is against policy. 20% should be *all on site*.
"Intermediate" affordable housing - rent or co-ownership. Relocate Choice housing from Donegall Street to Academy Street or two other options - *off site*.
Transport - extant scheme had 1000+ parking spaces. Revised has 25 disabled spaces, 6 car club spaces.
Economic Development - "600 jobs during construction, 1600 jobs during operation." Significant economic benefits for the city...
Regeneration - good access to services? We would query that!
"Revised scheme considered marked improvement to extant scheme" - i.e. not as bad, but still bad.
Nicola Golden - HED - now about to speak...
Nicola makes the point that this proposal is significantly different to the extant 2012 permission and shows the two visuals in comparison. Grey is 2012 permission - yellow is proposed 
Alan Cahoon representing Cathedral Blgs, St Anne's Cathedral, SaveCQ, CQ Trust up next
Points out that none of us are against developing the area.
Reads out the Strategic Planning Policy Statement stating the need to look at adverse impacts due to daylight, sunlight and overshadowing - the policy test for this has not been met!
PPS 16 also says that we need to protect our tourism assets - Tribeca impacts negatively on St Anne's Cathedral - one of best loved buildings in the city and draws in thousands of people every year.
Development also does not satisfy PPS 8 in reducing the size of Writer's Square - the policy test here has not been met either!
Points out that approving this application will reduce public space without being able to guarantee the pedestrianisation of the streets in the area - the argument being given by Castlebrooke for reducing Writer's Sq!
@oharamal and @AineGroogan asking really relevant questions on the public space and community benefits - pointing on the continuous reference of the scheme being 'acceptable'.
Alan pointing out that despite his building being right next to the development he has not had any discussions with Castlebrooke over the last few years.
Simon Hamilton up next representing Belfast Chamber in support of the development - believes the public space proposal is acceptable!
Hamilton stating that this scheme is what Belfast desperately needs and Destination CQ agrees.
Craig O'Brien from Savills as agents for Castlebrooke. £213 GVA per annum. Green travel measures - is that the 6 car club spaces for the 347 units?
Concludes that the scheme meets the ambitious Belfast Agenda.
Dawson Stelfox representing Consarc up now to speak as conservation architects for the scheme. Writer's Sq will be a better space - we shouldn't act as if it is a 'paragon of virtue'
Question about whether the Housing Executive and Choice Housing have been involved in the discussions on Section 76 agreement for the housing? Why is the site ok for the intermediate housing but not for the social housing?
Castlebrooke confirming the social housing will go onto a site on Academy Street or on the site, still to be decided....
Housing Executive saying a lot of issues still to sort out with Academy St - should these not be sorted out before a decision is made? Also says the Housing Executive can't be totally agreeable to the designs overall at the moment.
Simon Hamilton saying he wouldn't presume to speak on behalf of all the businesses in the area....
Simon Hamilton speaking about the need to connect with other developments in the area....we'd be keen to know if these conversations are actually taking place?
DfI confirming that pedestrianisation was part of the original scheme. Points out that these streets will need to be opened to buses and traffic.....so not an adequate replacement for the loss of Writer's Square then?
@oharamal we are seeing a lot of dismissing of Writer's Sq but policy says that public space considerations should be irrespective of the condition of the space. We agree! It's there now and lots of people have been using it since March to socially distance!
Castlebrooke agent saying that because it's only 1 and 2 bedroom flats there won't be many children in it...exactly our point!
Conor Maskey pointing out lack of clarity around the social housing issue....also why is that name (don't say it!) still sticking around even though there is a clear dislike for it across the city??
Aine Groogan states that we are still not clear on issues relating to economic viability, height, overshadowing, reduction in open space, and residential courtyards. Points out the breach in BRE guidelines - it will render some of the spaces unusable!
Castlebrooke agents clarifying that they never said this scheme should be approved because of viability....
Castlebrooke saying that there are always daylight and sunlight issues to address in cities centres...
@KateNicholl seeking reassurance - people in this city are suspicious. How truly public will the public spaces be? Also not convinced about the issues around the dominance of the tall building and how it will affect St Anne's Cathedral.
The ownership of the public spaces doesn't seem to have been agreed since this scheme was submitted...3 years ago...
Will they be publicly owned and open to everyone or will they be privately owned and 'managed' in how they are used?
Will they be publicly owned and open to everyone or will they be privately owned and 'managed' in how they are used?
Dawson Stelfox representing Castlebrooke stating that they have spent a lot of time on Assembly Buildings and that it is an incredibly important building for the city - we are putting the emphasis back on that through the restoration. Believes they have got the right balance.
@AineGroogan saying that she's still 'as clear as mud' on the public space arrangements...so are we Aine!
Discussion around car club spaces - need for clarification on how long these need to be in place as part of the development agreement (Section 76).
Ardur Carson now re-emphasising the concerns raised about the social housing aspect - not convinced that the proposed Academy Street blg will be appropriate. Wants clarity as to why it can't be provided on the site.
Working out the gross value added partly from office accommodation...Craig O'Brien confirming that these calculations were done pre-covid - wouldn't it be sensible to have a look at what the economics of the scheme are post-covid?
And the pre-determination hearing is concluded....taking a quick 10min break before planning committee starts!
@threadreaderapp
unroll please
unroll please
