►
From YouTube: Local Plan Working Group, 20 October 2020
Description
AGENDA (To view individual agenda items click on the links below)
1. Declarations of Interest 00:00:25
2. Minutes 00:00:32
3. Public Participation 00:00:47
4. Huntington Neighbourhood Plan - Examiner's Report and Proposed Modifications 00:00:56
5. Temporary Amendments to the Council's Statement of Community Involvement 00:21:47
6. York Local Plan Update 00:56:41
For full agenda, attendance details and supporting documents visit:
https://democracy.york.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=128&MId=12429
A
Okay,
welcome
to
this
meeting
of
the
local
planned
working
group,
the
virtual
meeting
of
tuesday,
the
20th
of
october
start
with
ite
apologies.
I've
received
from
councillor
doughty
and
councillor
rowley
is
with
us
today.
I've
had
apologies
from
councillor
orwell
and
councillor.
Dortmund
is
with
us,
and
I've
had
apologies
from
councillor
parrot
and
councillor
melly.
It's
with
us
senator
eisenwald
on
the
agenda.
Does
anybody
have
any
declarations
of
interest.
B
A
A
Item
three
public
participation:
we
have
no
members
of
the
public
registered
to
speak,
which
is
most
unusual
for
local
planned
working
groups,
but
well
we
won't
take
it
personally
and
so
we'll
go
straight
into
substantive
items,
which
is
the
first
one
is
item
number
four:
the
huntington
neighborhood
plan,
examiner's
report
and
proposed
modifications
I'll
hand
over
to
mike
slater
to
do
a
short
introduction
and
introduce
relevant
offices.
Thank
you,
chair.
D
Good
afternoon
members
and
colleagues
we've
got
three
reports
for
you
this
afternoon.
The
first
two
reports
are
going
to
go
to
the
executive
later
on
in
the
week
for
consideration
following
your
input
and
for
decision.
Hopefully,
the
third
report
is
an
update
on
the
york
local
plan.
The
first
two
will
be
introduced
by
colleagues
item
for
the
huntington
neighborhood
plan,
examiner's
report
and
modifications
my
colleague
anna
paulson's,
going
to
introduce
that
one.
D
E
The
examiner's
report
was
received
by
the
council
on
the
21st
of
february
of
this
year
and
can
be
seen
at
annex
a
to
this
report.
Overall,
the
examiner
recommends
to
the
council
that,
subject
to
the
incorporation
of
modifications
set
out
in
his
report,
that
the
huntington
neighbourhood
plan
should
proceed
to
referendum.
E
The
examiner's
report
includes
a
series
of
modifications
which
are
summarized
in
the
report
and
are
set
out
to
annex
b
due
to
the
pandemic.
Officers
have
been
delayed
in
presenting
this
report
to
members
as
set
out
in
our
report.
Since
the
conclusion
of
the
examination,
there
has
been
a
high
court
judgment
relevant
to
decisions
in
relation
to
york's
greenbelt
ahead
of
the
adoption
of
the
local
plan
and
a
threatened
legal
challenge
against
the
huntington
neighborhood
plan.
E
This
clarifies
that
decisions
in
advance
the
adoption
on
whether
to
treat
land
as
falling
within
greenbelt
for
development
management
purposes
should
be
taken
into
account.
The
general
extent
of
the
greenbelt
in
the
rss,
the
draft
local
plan
from
april
2005,
the
emerging
local
plan
and
also
site
specific
features
in
deciding
whether
land
should
be
regarded
as
greenbelt.
E
The
council
does
have
capacity
to
modify
the
report,
if
required,
where
we
propose
to
make
a
decision
which
differs
from
that
recommended
by
the
examiner
and
the
reason
for
the
difference
is
wholly
or
partly
as
a
result
of
new
evidence
of
a
new
fact
of
a
different
view
taken
by
the
authority
to
a
particular
fact.
Additionally,
the
authority
must
consult
on
those
proposals.
E
E
In
terms
of
next
steps,
members
are
asked
to
recommend,
to
executive,
to
accept
annex
c
for
consultation
purposes
and
to
proceed
with
the
consultation
on
the
proposed
additional
modifications
and
subject
to
this
being
agreed.
Officers
will
proceed
with
a
consultation
and
bring
forward
a
further
report
to
members
in
due
course
to
make
a
decision
on
the
huntington,
neighborhood
plan
examine
his
report
and
the
additional
modifications
to
enable
the
plan
to
proceed
to
referendum.
D
Sure,
if
I
could
just
come
in
just
to
add
to
that,
I
think
members
will
be
aware
that,
in
terms
of
referendum,
then
the
government
have
said
there'll
be
no
be
no
referendums
until
may
next
year.
That
was
announced
some
time
ago.
Whether
that
remains
to
be
the
case.
I
guess
only
time
will
tell
so.
There
is
work
that
we
can
do
here
to
get
this
in
a
good
position
for
that
stage
and
this
time
to
do
a
consultation
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
E
E
We
also
suggest
that
in
policy
h14
it
should
remove
the
reference
to
map
three,
which
is
essentially
showing
the
2005
green
belt
boundary
and
instead
reference
the
rss
or
the
regional
spatial
strategy,
key
diagram,
which
will
show
the
general
extent
of
the
green
belt,
which
in
onyx
c
you
can
see,
is
map
5.
That
shows
the
rss
key
diagram.
E
In
addition
policy
h14,
we
suggest
that
to
indicate
more
clearly
that
the
inner
boundary
of
the
green
belt
will
be
defined
through
the
local
plan
process,
because
that's
that's
the
role
of
the
of
the
local
plan.
Rather
than
the
neighborhood
plan
d.
We
suggest
that
h14
and
the
supporting
text
that
we
state
that
until
the
green
belt
boundaries
are
defined
through
the
adopted
local
plan.
E
A
F
F
But
I
suppose
I
want
to
ask
the
question.
First
of
all,
I
know
it's
been
mentioned
somewhere
in
the
document.
Has
the
examiner
actually
seen
the
proposed
changes
to
the
greenbelt
plan
and
approved
them?
I'm
sure
mike
or
anna
could
could
mention
that.
I
think
that's
my
that's
my
first
question
I'll
come
back
later
on,
as
other
things
turn
up.
If
I
may,
please.
D
G
Thanks
chair,
I
think
probably
it's
a
similar
sort
of
question
really.
I
just
wanted
to
just
make
sure
I've
got
the
right
understanding
of
page
12,
paragraph
27,
which
is
subject
to
members,
acceptance
of
making
a
decision
different
to
the
examiners
and
and
goes
on
so
broadly
speaking.
What
we're
saying
is
that
the
examiner
made
a
recommendation.
G
They
didn't
have
information
available
to
them,
so
we're
making
a
decision
which
is
slightly
different
than
the
examiners
made
because
of
the
new
information,
we're
looking
to
consult
on
the
specific
changes
that
are
relating
to
the
new
information
and
then
we'll
take
into
account.
All
of
the
other
modifications
that
the
examiner
has
suggested.
F
H
Cowboy
thank
you
chair.
This
is
such
a
minor
point
that
I
I
hesitate
to
make
it,
but
nevertheless
I
think
it
it
it's
worth
just
asking
this
this
question.
I
noticed
that
the
the
table
4
appearing
initially
on
page
27
and
then
page
107,
is
amended
to
some
degree,
but
strangely
repeats
sandandra's,
church
and
all
saints
church.
I'm
sure
it's
just
a
typo
or
maybe
there's
some
other
explanation.
H
H
A
E
A
Do
yep
the
one
question
I
I
had
was
around
the
the
judicial
review
from
from
the
developer
seems
to
be
directed
at
the
is
it
directed
inspector
or
us
because
they
seem
to
be
questioning
the
work
of
the
inspector,
and
I
was
just
very
intrigued
at
how
you
could
jr
an
independent
examiner
and
what
precisely
the
grounds
for
that
would
be,
because
no
decision
has
been
made.
The
independent
examiner
has
done
his
job,
which
is
to
provide
a
report
on
commentary.
I
just
wouldn't
have
thought
that
would
have
been
available
to
jr.
J
Do
you
want
me
if
I
may
come
in
their
chair?
The
judicial
review
was
threatened
against
the
decision
that
could
be
made
by
members
executive
if
we
went
ahead
to
make
a
decision
on
the
report
and
the
modifications
in
the
examiner's
report,
if
we
didn't
make
any
modifications
pertaining
to
the
green
belt
policies,
so
it
was
almost
a
pre-notification
of
a
of
a
judicial
review
as
opposed
to
against
the
decision
that
members
may
make,
as
opposed
to
against
the
examiner's
report
itself.
D
E
I
think
it
was
maybe
because
they
examined
examined
the
plan
following
the
the
submission
consultations
which
took
place
over
sort
of
christmas
of
last
year,
and
he
wrote
his
report,
which
she
published
on
the
21st
of
february
of
this
year,
but
the
wedgwood
case
didn't
come
out
until
until
march,
so
it
was,
he
would
be
unaware,
I
guess,
of
the
of
the
wedgewood
decision,
because
it
wouldn't
have
been
made
at
the
time
he
made.
He
published
his
report.
J
So
I
think
the
inspector,
the
examiner
sorry
took
that
decision
and
the
same
decision
has
been
taken
with
the
some
of
the
previously
made
plans
as
well,
that
are
now
in
force
in
terms
of
showing
the
2005
boundary,
because
it
was
an
approved
decision
by
members
in
2005.
As
a
representative
boundary
thanks.
A
A
A
K
Earlier
this
year,
the
government,
through
the
national
planning
practice
guidance,
encouraged
local
authorities
to
review
their
scis
in
light
of
the
current
over
19
pandemic
to
reflect
the
social
distancing,
restrictions
are
in
place,
so
officers
have
undertaken
such
a
review.
The
outcomes
are
presented
at
annex
a
to
the
committee
reports,
highlighting
the
consultation
measures
that
we
suggest
perhaps
need
to
be
temporarily
suspended.
K
So,
as
our
paragraph
3
we're
asking
members
to
recommend
to
executive
three
things
to
agree,
the
temporary
revisions
to
the
sei
are
set
out
in
annex
a
to
authorize
officers
to
publish
the
covering
note
on
the
council's
website
and
then
to
agree
to
delegate
authority
to
when
the
decision
is
made
to
temporary,
to
lift
the
temporary
temporarily
suspended
methods
when
we're
able
to
include
them
again.
Thank
you,
chad.
I
I
I
have
whenever
we
look
to
suspend
the
norm
for
a
temporary
period
and
whilst
I
understand
the
officer's
comments
that
it's
going
to
be
temporarily
suspended
until
such
times
as
we're
able
to
go
back
to
the
norm,
I
just
have
a
slight
fear
about
not
putting
a
review
date
in
there,
so
whether
it
could
be
suspended
with
a
with
a
review
at
a
particular
point.
That
would
be
my
only
thought,
chair.
A
D
It's
quite
hard
to
know.
There
may
be
some
measures
that
we
could
bring
back
in
sooner
than
others.
It's
really
hard
to
put
a
a
data.
I
don't
know
whether
francis
or
alice,
and
have
a
view
on
that.
We're
happy
to
clearly
want
to
review
it.
We
want
to
bring
in
the
measures
that
we
had
previously
as
soon
as
we
can.
I.
G
Yeah,
thank
you
chair.
I
was
actually
going
to
make
a
similar
point
to
council
rowley
and
I
was
going
to
propose
a
amended
wording
for
recommendation
three.
So
if
I
can
formally
move
a
change
in
wording,
so
what
we
would
suggest
is
to
insert
so
it
would
read,
agree
to
delegate
authority
for
a
period
of
up
to
six
months
to
the
corporate
director
and
then
add
at
the
end
of
the
paragraph
there.
L
L
I
don't
know
how
you
define
when
the
pandemic
ends
and
these
changes
do
represent
quite
a
bit
of
rollback
in
democratic
engagement,
which
is
a
serious
matter.
I
understand
what's
necessary,
but
is
a
serious
matter.
I
don't
think
as
a
committee,
it's
right
to
agree
to
these
changes
just
indefinitely.
I
think
it
does
need
to
come
back
for
renewal
for
reapproval.
I
D
A
Thing
I'd
want
to
check
on
mike
is,
as
it
goes
to
exactly
if
this
is
the
proof
which
I'm
sure
it
will
be.
Is
that
we
don't
inadvertently.
Do
it
the
wrong
way,
so
that
you
can't
bring
back
something
else,
because
you're
tied
to
a
decision
that
limits
it
to
six
months
and
just
make
sure
we've
got
the
flexibility.
D
L
Yeah,
I
think
what
council
of
course
proposed.
So
I
don't
put
words
in
his
mouth,
but
what
I
heard
was
that
that
if
the
decision
isn't
reversed
within
six
months,
then
it
has
to
come
back
to
a
committee.
It
doesn't
remove
the
delegate
the
ability
for
a
delegated
decision
to
be
made
to
reverse
these
temporary
changes.
M
A
M
Magic
thanks
chair
and
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
obviously
get
the
need
for
and
if
you
like,
the
temporary
change
given
the
times
we're
in,
but
I'm
not
convinced
that
we're
still
doing
everything
that
we
can
and
I
do
have
a
concern
that
people
who
are
both
socially
isolated
and
digitally
inactive
or.
However,
you
want
to
phrase
that
will
be
marginalized
by
what
was
saying,
and
can
we
have
a
conversation
about
that
as
a
committee
I
mean
thinking
out
loud
there
and
given
how
infrequent
it
would
be
needed
to
take
place.
M
I
would
like
the
council
to
at
least
offer
certain
people
the
chance
to
have
documentation
posted
out
to
them.
If
they
really
don't
have
anyone
they
can
ask.
I
mean,
I
think,
the
idea
that
we'll
ask
residents
to
ask
a
friend
or
family
member
or,
however,
it's
worded
in
the
paper,
it's
it
it
just
for
me,
it's
a
bit
embarrassing.
I
think
we
can
do
more
than
that.
You
know
in
the
year
2020
and
so
yeah.
That's
just
the
point
of
concern.
I
wonder
what
other
members
think
really.
A
I
had
flagged
that
myself,
counselor
taylor
and
I'll
be
I'll,
be
honest,
the
library
issue.
I
was
going
to
raise
that
question
myself,
because
while
I
see
that
we
shouldn't
necessarily
the
moment
be
encouraging
mass
travel
to
west
offices,
our
libraries
are
open.
So
I
wasn't
entirely
sure
why
we
couldn't
still
be
making
hard
copies
available
at
the
libraries.
D
Okay,
I
think
we
can
pick
up
both
of
those.
Certainly,
both
becky's
myself
have
been
open
to
any
representation.
Some
individuals
or,
on
behalf
of
individuals,
have
problem
getting
hold
of
information,
certainly
for
some
planning
applications.
It
could
be
that
you
know
key
drawings
or
key
diagrams
or
information
could
be
sent
out
rather
than
just
everything.
A
And
it's
worth
saying
mac
as
well:
it's
not
it's
sometimes
slightly
more
complicated.
It's
my
initial
view,
being
it's
not
always
easy
to
see
planning
documents
on
a
computer,
but
then
we
refer
to
people
who
digitally
excluded,
that
there
are
scales
towards
that.
So
there's
a
couple
of
people
who
do
technically
have
access
to
the
internet,
but
that's
through
the
phone
and
trying
to
go
through
a
really
complicated
planning.
A
Application
on
a
two-inch
screen
is
not
entirely
something
that
you're
able
to
do
so
just
because
people
do
have
access
and
it
might,
it
may
be
a
small
small
tablet.
It
may
be
something
else
they
have
it,
but
actually
being
able
to
physically
go
through
some
very
complicated
planning.
Drawings
is
quite
a
challenge.
Counselor
norman.
N
Yeah
cheers
partially
just
to
sort
of
back
up.
That
point
really.
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
tackle
digital
exclusions
as
best
we
can-
and
I
would
note
that,
certainly
when
it's
come
to
the
sort
of
process
for
informing
residents
and
and
collecting
views
with,
regards
to
traffic
measures
has
involved
more
of
sending
out
information
to
people
than,
and
it
previously
would
have
done
it
in
a
physical
format.
N
I
think
it's
really
important
that
if
we
are
using
other
kinds
of
measures
for
for
face-to-face
meetings,
public
exhibitions
etc
that
we
have
sort
of
firm
wording
about
that,
and
I
think
the
the
current
sort
of
bit
in
the
document
about
the
council
seeking
to
engage
virtually
using
social.
Some
software
platforms
is
maybe
a
little
loose
and
potentially
could
be,
could
be
tightened
up
into
a
more
firm
commitment
rather
than
the
word
seek.
D
Okay,
thank
you
just
to
retreat
comments
that
francis
made
earlier
this
is
some
temporary
amendments
potentially
to
our
statement
of
community
involvement,
but
we've
recognized.
We
need
to
do
a
refresh
anyway.
So
some
of
the
points
such
as
council
norman's,
just
made,
you
know
we
can
build
into
our
refresh
as
well
and
the
other
thing
I
think
members
have
made
reference
to
some
of
the
planning
reforms.
We
we
wait
with
interest.
D
What
the
outcome
of
that
is,
because
our
representations,
I
think,
as
a
planning
authority
to
government,
are
that
we
still
think
that
there
is
a
need
for
providing
information,
as
we
do
by
writing
to
individuals
by
emailing
people
and
having
site
notices
and
we're
unconvinced
professionally.
I
think
as
to
how
many
people
will
find
out
about
what's
going
on
in
the
area
if
we
were
to
to
stop
those
those
ways
of
publicizing
planning
applications.
L
Thank
you,
chair
yeah.
I
am,
I
appreciated,
seeing
the
proposal
to
extend
the
consultation
period
from
21
days
for
28
days
because,
as
just
been
said,
people
are
out
and
about
less
less
likely
to
notice
the
notices-
and
you
know
less
likely
to
just
be
talking
to
their
friends
and
neighbours
as
before.
People
are
just
generally
a
bit
more
isolated
yeah.
I
I
couldn't
really
see
enough
justification
in
the
report
for
the
suspension
of
having
paper
copies
available
in
the
library.
L
I
know
we've
already
discussed
it,
but
I
do
think
that,
as
I
already
said,
we
are
talking
about
reducing
democratic
engagement.
I
would
just
like
to
see
more
justification
for
it,
so
that
we
know
that
this
decision
is
yeah
is
justified
and
if
it
really
we've
talked
about
digital
exclusion,
usually
the
council
is
quite
good
at
providing
digital
support
in
west
offices.
In
the
vista
center
there
are
computers,
there's
people
on
hand
to
help,
seeing
as
that
extra
digital
support
isn't
available.
At
the
moment,
it's
even
more
important
that
the
non-digital
availability
is
there.
K
O
Thank
you
for
that
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
am
a
little
bit
concerned
about
them.
The
statement
that
this
can
be
done
in
the
refresh,
which
goodness
knows
when
that
might
be,
and
I
think
that
it's
important
that
we
get
this
sorted
out
for
what's
going
to
happen
in
the
immediate
period
between
now
and
when
that
refresh
happens
and
not
as
councillor
melli's
already
said
that
we
we
create
a
democratic
deficit.
O
D
Sorry,
I
wasn't
meaning
to
say
that
these
things
weren't
important-
we
shouldn't
address
them
today,
councilor
douglas.
I
think
there
are
some
things
generally,
though,
on
on
the
wider
review
of
the
document
and
the
engagement
and
use
of
social
media
that
I
think
we
can.
We
can
look
at
further
in
in
more
detail,
but
we
need
to
address
these,
these
immediate
things
and
building
sort
of
flexibility
to
get
back
to
some
of
the
normal
ways
that
we
have
perhaps
for
communication
and
encouraging
people
to
to
participate.
L
Thanks
calling
me
on
me
yet
again,
chair
paragraph
12
on
page
136
states
that
officers
will
be
able
to
discuss
planning
matters
by
telephone
now.
I'm
just
wondering.
I
know
that
these
are
kind
of
proposed
changes,
but
realistically
this
is
kind
of
how
the
council's
been
operating
for
the
past
six
or
seven
months.
So
do
we
have
evidence
from
the
previous
few
months
of
how
effectively
and
how
available
council
of
council
offices
are
to
answer
planning
questions
on
the
phone.
L
Just
anecdotally
had
quite
a
few
residents
approach
me
now
on
saying
that
they've
tried
to
get
through
to
the
council.
They've
called
multiple
times,
they've
had
callbacks
and
they
haven't
been
able
to
get
answers
to
their
questions
about
planning
applications
on
the
phone.
That's
why
they've
ended
up
approaching
the
local
councillors
to
ask
questions
about
planning
applications,
because
that
system
hasn't
been
working
just.
D
D
So
I
think
measures
are
in
place
now
to
be
able
to
people
to
be
able
to
speak
to
them
directly,
but
I
will
check
with
you
as
to
where
that
is
and
whether
that's,
whether
that's
everyone,
people
are
still
working
from
home
and
people
have
got
all
sorts
of
issues.
Some
people
have
just
broadband
issues
from
where
they
work,
for
example,
or
don't
have
you
know,
landlines.
L
I'll
talk
to
you
outside
the
meeting
about
specific
examples,
but
no
some
of
them
was
just
last
week
a
resident
was
trying
to
get
through
to
the
council
on
a
on
a
new
planning
application.
That's
just
gone
in
so
this.
This
was
recent.
I
think
she
said
she
tried
three
times
to
call
the
council
to
get.
She
had
specific
answers
about
amendments
to
a
planning,
application
and
couldn't
get
any
answer
over
the
phone.
I
mean
it
might
be
a
one-off
or
I'm
hoping
seeing
as
this
has
been
the
situation
for
six
months.
D
Okay,
I
don't
have
the
the
details
to
be
able
to
answer
that
or
the
evidence
to
be
able
to
say
just
where
we
are
on
that.
But
I
do
know
there
were.
There
were
technical
problems
and
difficulties
in
contacting
people
and
through
email,
people,
home
working
wasn't
geared
up
for
people
to
to
be
able
to
speak
to
people
on
the
phone
on
their
own.
But
I
think
now
we
have
some
cheap
and
affordable
mobile
phones
that
have
been
distributed
to
planning
offices
so
that
their
numbers,
those
numbers,
can
be
used.
A
M
If
the
committee
could
back
that,
I
mean
I
know
it's
temporary,
but
I
think
the
fact
that
it
is
temporary
means
that
we
should
be
making
more
of
an
effort
to
to
bridge
those
gaps
rather
than
sort
of
shuffle
back
and
yeah
that
that's
my
only
ask
and
it's
to
try
and
move
this
conversation
on
a
bit.
I
hope
you
don't
mind.
I'm.
A
Going
to
do
completely
opposite
counter-tail,
unfortunately,
because
I
was
I
was
going
to
take
a
vote,
but
I'm
conscious.
I've
got
quite
a
few
points
and
there
may
be
other
things
that
people
flag
up
before
we
actually
say,
which
particular
when
we
get
the
whole
lot
in
before
we
do
it.
Council
julia.
P
Thanks
jane
sorry,
I
guess
it's
just
trying
to
understand
a
bit
what
that
might
mean,
because
some
planning
applications
could
be
sort
of
thousands
and
thousands
of
you
people,
maps
and
all
the
rest
of
it.
So
perhaps,
if
the
I
guess,
if
the
resolution
was
planning
to
go
away
and
think
about
how
we
might
best,
do
that
and
then
bring
that
to
to
executive
rather
than
committing
them
to
posting
thousands
of
pages.
A
I
Thanks
chair,
I
I
I
broadly
support
councillor
taylor's
suggestion.
My
only
slight
hesitation
would
be.
There
was
the
word
with
certain
circumstances.
Whenever
you
begin
to
legislate
and
use
the
word
circumstances.
You've
got
to
then
list
what
those
circumstances
are.
So
I
yeah
I
welcome
and
support
councillor
taylor's
suggestion,
but
with
some
more
clarity.
M
Thanks
chair
and
thank
you
councillor,
I
totally
get
what
you
mean.
I
mean
I
guess
it
would
be
extremely
difficult
for
the
council
to
have
a
perfectly
efficient
system
on
this
question,
but
in
my
mind
it
would
be,
as
almost
the
case
of
the
resident
rings,
the
council's
planning
team
and-
and
they
are
then
asked
the
series
of
questions.
M
A
Wording
by
committee
is
not
always
the
greatest
thing
to
achieve,
but
on
that
point
I'll
go
through
the
points
that
I
had
mike
so
paragraph
12
has
already
been
mentioned
and
by
two
of
the
members
I
equally
have
that
concern
of
there
are.
There
will
be
people
that
don't
have
friends
and
family
that
they
can
use
in
terms
of
submitting
applications.
So
I
did
wonder
I've
just
written
the
word
proxy
down.
I'm
not
really
sure
what
I
was
thinking
about
that.
A
A
There
was
the
issue
around
people,
people
asking
other
people
to
send
in
comments
for
a
planning
application,
seeing
that,
from
the
other
end
from
a
planning
committee,
I
have
some
concerns
about
how
that
would
be
represented
when
it
came
to
any
report
to
a
planning
committee,
because
it
would
seem
anomalous.
For
example,
if
they've
got
a
relative
in
milton
keynes
to
send
in
an
objection
to
something
happening
at
their
mother's
house
in
york,
next
door
from
a
planet
committee
perspective,
you
may
be
looking
at
that
thinking.
Well.
A
Why
is
this
person
in
milton
keynes
so
concerned
about
that,
so
making
sure
that
where
people
have
submitted
comments
on
behalf
of
somebody
else,
it's
clear
that
it's
actually
related
to
the
property
that
it
that
it's
at
absolutely
on
page
143,
despite
the
fact
that
we
say
throughout
the
people
can
call
if
they
need
to
call,
we
don't
actually
have
the
telephone
number
on
that
particular
paragraph.
So.
D
D
I
think
somebody
mentioned
post
offices,
but
depending
where
you
are
you
know,
if
it's
one
of
the
rural
parishes,
is
there
a?
Is
it
a
village
hall?
Is
there
somewhere
you
can
get
access
to
that?
I
think
what
we
would
have
to
clearly
try
and
avoid
is
what
we
could
just
be
overwhelmed
with
requests
for
printing,
that
I
don't
think
the
council
either
has
the
capacity
within
the
within
the
print
room
or
the
budget.
A
Off
the
top
of
my
head,
it's
just
come
to
me
the
for
the
for
those
that
have
them
where
there
are
parish
councils.
Post
councils
tend
to
have
planning
subcommittees
who
actually
like
faculty
without
price
council.
They
do
unfortunately,
knoxville
I've
got
public
meetings,
but
they
do
actually
project
the
planning
applications
in
that
ward
in
that
parish
onto
the
screen,
and
it's
probably
meeting
that
people
can
go
and
actually
see
that
we
have
got
local
planning
panels
in
places
that
aren't
parishes.
A
B
You
yeah,
I
take
your
point
about
parish
councils
parish,
council
offices,
as
we
have
in
strengthel.
I
should
that's
the
problem
and,
of
course,
if
somebody's
digitally
unable
to
access
a
meeting
or
parish
council
subcommittee
meetings
now
for
planning
are
held
online,
so
it
doesn't
really
help
them.
The
difficulty
is
where
on
earth
can
we
put
them
we're
looking
strength,
so
we've
got
a
library,
but
there
are
other
and
that's
not
open
very
often
at
the
moment,
but
it
is
open,
but
there
are
other
parishes
which
may
be.
B
L
I
just
wanted
to
just
confirm
these
proposed
changes.
They're
just
changes
to
the
statutory
minimum
required.
It's
not
saying
that
other
forms
of
consultation
or
ways
of
displaying
plans
won't
be
allowed
or
will
needed.
There
won't
have
to
be
some
sort
of
decision
made
either
by
officer
exec
to
remove
these
temporary
changes
in
order
to
do
more
than
the
statutory
minimum.
L
D
D
J
Yes,
so
our
understanding
is
that
these
this
is
the
changes
to
the
minimum
standards
we
can
go
over
and
above
this,
if
we
were
able
to
at
short
notice
and
that's
part
of
potentially
the
delegated
decision
in
terms
of
removing
the
temporary
suspensions
or
our
ability
to
to
consult
wider.
Using
the
methods
that
we
have
available
to
us.
K
M
D
A
So
my
suggestion
is,
I'm
not
sure
it's
going
to
feed
anybody
or
nobody
or
everybody
is
that
we
take
the
recommendations
of
written,
as
amended
with
council.
Of
course,
yours
suggestions
and
then
adding
an
additional
recommendation
that
notes
the
the
concerns
that
were
raised
by
the
committee
in
terms
of
those
who
may
be
excluded
from
participating
and
request
officers
to
provide
an
update
to
executive
on
measures
that
can
be
taken
to
address
those
concerns.
M
A
It
was
I
was,
I
was
assuming
that
the
note
would
include
all
the
comments
that
were
raised,
I'm
hoping
that
our
minute
takers
got
them
all
recorded.
Otherwise,
I'm
gonna
have
to
go
back
and
watch
the
whole
thing,
but
the
idea
was
to
list
all
the
concepts.
That's
why
I
said
the
concerns
raised,
so
you
can
list
all
those
and
then
specifically
answer
each
one
in
turn.
Well,.
M
L
Thanks
chair
yeah,
I
was
going
to
say
more
or
less
the
same
things,
I'm
not
comfortable
with
approving
the
recommendations
as
they
are
because
it
includes
things
like
paper,
copies,
availability,
libraries
is
temporarily
suspended
and
that's
something
that
I
feel
as
committee
we
agreed
shouldn't
be
like
we.
We
appreciate
that
paper.
Copies
may
be
less
available
at
libraries
due
to
reduced
opening
times,
but
I
don't
think,
as
a
committee
we've
agreed
to
recommend
that
paper
copies
will
just
will
be
suspended
for.
A
Example,
yeah
I
had
a
vision
that
would
be
picked
up
as
part
of
the
document.
The
part
of
the
addendum
that
was
that
we're
going
to
send
through
was
my
intention.
It
wasn't
to
to
ignore
that,
because
I
say
that,
but
my
that
response
to
digital
exclusion
would
be
around
paper
copies
of
libraries,
paper,
copies
of
village
halls.
That's
what
I'd
envisaged
that
to
be,
as
my
concern
is,
if
we
try
and
get
everything
down,
we'll
miss
something
at
this
point
and
then.
D
Sorry,
we've
picked
up
the
need
for
flexibility.
We've
picked
up
the
need
to
get
back
to
the
normal,
wherever
we
can
as
quickly
as
we
can,
and
we've
picked
up
that
in
terms
of
libraries
and
other
venues.
We
need
some
sort
of
flexibility
and
to
be
able
to
point
out
to
people,
perhaps
that
whilst
there
may
be
copies
of
things
in
in
locations,
they
may
need
to
be
aware
that
the
the
normal
sort
of
opening
hours
may
may
vary
from
what
they
would
perhaps
have
expected.
Some
months
ago
in.
A
So
if
we
amend
my
amended
amendment
to
say
that
that
document
that
go
through
to
executive
recommendations
is
approved
by
chair
and
vice
chair
ben
callum
you'll
have
a
chance
to
ensure
that
anything
that
you
wanted
in
there
is
in
there
because
it's
it's
not
an
attempt
to
keep
it
out.
It's
just.
I
don't
want
to
try
and
sit
here
and
try
and
list
all
the
sort
of
things
that
we've
tried
to
mention
and
miss
some
stuff
out.
C
A
G
Thanks
chad,
I
was
going
to
offer
a
potential
second
slight
work
around
as
well
just
on
recommendation
one.
If,
if
we
change
the
first
couple
of
words,
so
instead
of
asking
or
recommending
executive
agree,
the
recommended
temporary
revisions,
if
we
ask
them
to
consider
the
updated
temporary
revisions.
A
A
D
Okay,
thank
you
chair.
Thank
you,
members.
I'm
gonna
start
on
this
and
then
bring
bring
alison
in
so
a
very
briefly,
and
the
report
gives
some
background.
There's
some
key
milestones
in
there.
In
the
background.
As
you
remember,
the
the
draft
local
plan
was
submitted
for
examination
back
in
in
may
2018.
D
D
There
were
questions
that
were
raised
by
some
of
the
participants
or
clarifications
that
emerged
from
that
and
in
in
the
report.
Paragraph
18,
on
pages
149
to
150,
sets
out
some
of
those
key
areas
of
what
we've
affectionately,
called
sort
of
local
plan
homework
and
that's
not
a
price.
That's
not
a
planning
term.
D
One
is
and
I'll
bring
allison
in
here,
because
this
is
really
quite
technical
and
legal
really,
but
the
habitat
regulations
assessment
work
that
has
been
associated
with
looking
at
the
the
site,
the
the
strengths
of
common
sight
and
protecting
that
he's
almost
there.
I
think
now,
but
not
quite
the
work
on
the
green
belt
that
the
inspectors
asked
us
to
do.
D
We
look
carefully
at
that
and
we
feel
that
or
we
felt
that,
having
taken
both
planning
and
legal
advice
that
we
needed
to
do
more
work
on
that
to
satisfy
the
inspectors
that
the
whole
approach
was
was
a
sound
approach
and
that
we
were
effectively
good
to
go
at
this
first
phase
on
the
general
principles
of
our
approach
to
greenbelt
and
we
could
move
into
phase.
Two
there's
been
quite
a
lot
of
work
to
do
on
that
using
external
help,
internal
help,
particularly
that
and
just
to
remind
people.
D
The
reason
really
why
york's
got
a
green
belt
is
to
protect
the
historic
character
and
setting
of
the
city
and
it's
one
of
the
few
green
belts
that
has
that
purpose
and
so
the
work
that
we've
done
with
english
heritage,
historic
england
over
a
number
of
years.
You
know
informed
very
much
of
that
process
and
we've
got
documentation
of
the
work.
That's
been
done,
but
we
perhaps
articulate
that
articulated
that
as
well
as
we
ought
to
have
done
with
hindsight
into
the
green
belt
paper.
D
One
of
the
problems
with
your
getting
a
local
plan
is
that
things
are
always
changing.
So
back
in
july
of
this
year,
the
office
of
national
statistics
produced
some
new
household
population,
so
household
formation
projections
and
the
inspectors
have
asked
to
comment
on
on
those
we've
commissioned
some
work
from
gl
hearn
who've
been
advising
us
on
these
matters,
as
well
as
a
number
of
other
authorities,
so
we've
been
dealing
with
that
as
well
and
alison
can
update
on
those
aspects.
J
Okay,
thank
you.
So,
in
relation
to
the
habitat
regulation
assessment,
we
we
did
produce
an
updated
habit,
regulation
assessment
last
year
and
unfortunately,
at
the
examination
hearing,
it
was
identified
that
part
of
the
report
that
we
had
submitted
wasn't
quite
laid
out
right
in
terms
of
some
of
the
case
law.
J
That
is
a
heathland
area
right
adjacent
to
the
to
stencil
village,
that
particular
parcel
of
land
has
been
contentious
in
terms
of
how
we've
looked
at
it
and
the
evidence
base
supporting
it.
So
originally,
when
we
submitted
the
plan,
we
included
the
allocation
as
you'll,
be
aware
for
a
queen
elizabeth,
barracks
and
strensel
for
500
homes.
J
That
work
has
been
all
going
with
our
consultants
this
year
and
we've
recently
concluded
that
and
we've
had
natural
england.
Look
at
the
outcomes
as
our
statutory
body
to
advise
us
on
on
the
outcomes
and
the
conclusions
that
we
have
reached.
We
have
now
concluded
that
report
and
there
are.
There
are
some
further
amendments
that
we
would
like
to
suggest
to
the
to
policy.
Natural
england
have
come
back
to
us
in
terms
of
their
response
now.
J
J
J
So,
as
mike
said,
they
positively
responded
to
the
work
that
we'd
already
submitted
in
terms
of
looking
at
the
outer
boundary
and
designated
the
outer
boundary
the
location
of
the
outer
boundary
of
the
green
belt,
and
they
also
confirmed
to
us
that
you
know
we're
not
setting
we're
not
establishing
any
new
greenbelt.
We
are
just
defining
the
boundaries
for
the
first
time.
J
We
we're
not
we're
we're
seeking
to
set
the
greenback
boundaries
around
our
needs,
as
opposed
to
demonstrating
exceptional
circumstances,
which
is
a
process
where
you
have
to
take
out
sites,
and
we
took
the
precautionary
approach
previously,
where
we
demonstrated
exceptional
circumstances
and
they've
said
we
don't
need
to
do
that.
They
also,
as
mike
said
confirmed
to
us
that
they
accept
the
primary
purpose
of
our
green
belt.
J
In
response
to
that,
in
terms
of
the
inspector's
letter
of
july
and
the
2018
based
household
projections,
we
were
asked
by
the
inspectors
to
clarify
whether
or
not
there
was
a
meaningful
change
in
relation
to
the
date.
The
work
that
we'd
submitted
last
year
and
discussed
examination,
and
that
was
that
we
proposed
an
amendment
last
year
to
our
submitted
plan.
So
our
submitted
plan
you
had
an
8
presented,
867
dwellings
per
annum
as
the
housing
need
figure.
J
J
That
is
proposed
in
the
projections
to
make
sure
we
meet
our
economic
aspirations
and
our
economic
aspirations,
as
set
out
in
the
plan,
is
for
650
jobs
per
annum,
so
that
790
figure
meets
those
aspirations
we
have
actually
received.
And
since
the
report
was
published
last
week,
we
have
actually
received
a
response
from
our
inspectors.
On
that
evidence
base
and
the
letter
we
submitted
to
them.
Referring
to
this
in
our
response
to
it
and
our
you
know,
our
response
said
that
we
were.
J
J
Just
to
say
as
well
that
the
inspectors
have
made
clear
in
their
update
to
us
and
in
their
letter
that
whilst
they've
asked
the
council
to
respond
on
this
matter,
they
have
made
it
clear
that
now
we
have
responded
to
this
matter.
Any
comments
on
the
contents
of
our
response
and
on
the
evidence
base
we've
submitted
should
be
held
until
we
consult
on
the
matters
in
public
and
then
they
go,
and
our
program
officer
has
confirmed
that
she's
returning
correspondence
to
anybody.
J
D
Thank
you,
allison
members,
just
to
say
in
terms
of
consultation,
we
we
haven't
got
the
details
from
the
inspector
we've
had
a
sort
of
an
indication
that
they
think
we
need
to
reconsult
on
on
our
homework.
We
envisage
that's,
probably
a
consultation
of
those
people
who
are
participants
at
the
stage
one
and
who
made
representations.
So
we
don't
think
this
is,
you
know
a
whole
city
consultation,
but
it
is
more
focused
giving
people
an
opportunity
to
make
further
comments
in
addition
to
those
they
made
last
december.
A
M
M
I
wondered
if
we
could
note
our
our
thanks
and
and
again
condolences
and
to
rachel
maysfield
the
council
officer,
who
passed
away
and
and
worked
so
much
and
so
hard
on
the
local
plan,
and
is
that
something
we
can
do
at
least
in
the
minutes
just
to
acknowledge
how
much
work
she
did
and
would
members
support
that.
I
know
that's
quite
heavy,
but
I
think
it's
probably
appropriate
and
and
the
right
thing
to.
C
C
C
J
So
we
think
that
there's
been
as
mike
sort
of
alluded
to.
We
think
that
the
the
almost
the
answer
we
have
got
to
is
the
correct
answer,
but
we
haven't
articulated
it
in
the
most
simple
and
straightforward
way.
So
what
we'd
that
the
principal
concern
from
the
inspectors
in
relation
to
the
green
belt-
and
it
is
to
do
with
the
methodology
council
car
principally
in
this-
is
the
sense
that
they
think
that
we
have
conflated.
J
So
we've
we've
looked
at
a
two-tier
approach
to
the
greenbelt,
so
we've
looked
at
sort
of
strategic
and
a
strategic
understanding
which
is
looking
at
sort
of
the
broad
city
and
understanding
the
wider
concept
of
greenbelt
in
context,
as
well
as
local
level.
Considerations
where
we've
looked
at
detailed
evidence
in
and
that's
the
basis
on
which
we've
based
our
detailed
decisions
on
the
on
the
location
of
the
green
belt
and
look
in
considering
openness
and
permanence.
J
As
as
I
said
previously,
in
terms
of
the
way
that
we've
looked
at
and
define
the
define
the
boundaries,
we
think
that
we've
just
we,
we
can
justify
the
boundaries
on
the
basis
of
where
they
are
at
the
moment.
We
think
there'll
be
very
limited
changes
in
accordance
with
when
we
look
at
the
when
we
look
at
review
the
methodology
and
when
we
review
that
against
the
boundaries
that
we've
identified,
we
think
they'll
be
very
limited
changes.
D
So,
just
to
add
to
that
I
think
we've
used
the
greenbelt
methodology
we
believe
appropriately,
but
what
we
then
looked
at
were
the
shapers
and
the
constraints
and
the
opportunities
to
decide
where
we
do
need
greenfield
sites
which
sites
perhaps
could
come
forward
within
the
green
belt
and
clearly
we
know
other
than
the
historic
character
and
setting
there
are
other
constraints.
We've
got
green
wedges,
we've
got
strays,
we've
got
flood
plains.
D
So
there
has
been
a
saving
process
effectively,
which
has
ruled
out
many
hundreds
of
sites
adjacent
to
and
next
to
the
urban
area.
Council
car.
We
always
envisaged
that
we
were
going
to
have
a
debate
on
many
of
these
sites
through
the
examination
process
because
of
the
land
interests
that
will
come
forward
and
people
will
try
and
persuade
the
inspectors
that
we've
got
the
boundaries
wrong
in
the
case
of
their
particular
land
ownership,
that
their
field,
for
some
reason
should
be
part
of
the
urban
area
and
not
a
green
field.
D
So
we
hadn't
envisaged
that
we
would
get
to
this
level
of
consideration
so
early
in
the
local
plan.
Examination
process.
But
we
need
to
do
a
little
bit
more
work
just
to
go
to
go
back
a
stage
to
show,
as
alison
has
explained,
that
we
have
followed
a
green
belt
methodology
in
terms
of
defining
the
green
belt.
And
what
is
quite
clear-
and
I
find
quite
interesting-
is
the
inspectors
have
accepted
from
the
evidence.
D
D
In
that
wider
rural
geography
to
demonstrate
that
that
has
a
green
belt
function,
but
it
feels
like
we
all
must
have
been
asked
to
do
that
at
this
stage
and
hence
we
think
we
need
to
represent
our
work
in
a
way.
That's
clearer
and
he's
supported
by
our
conversations
with
historic
england.
Colleagues
hope
that
helped.
It
was
a
long
answer.
Sorry.
C
D
D
D
So
in
those
circumstances
I
can
see
no
reason
why
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
progress
with
the
local
plan,
like
many
other
authorities,
if
we
get
into
some
of
the
planning
reforms-
and
we
have
this
sort
of
simplified
zonal
system,
then
plans
that
are
already
approved
would
have
to
be
revisited
to
see
how
they're
perhaps
represented,
and
the
same
could
be
for
for
york.
But
we
could
be
many
many
many
months
down
the
line
before
I
think
that
has
an
effect.
D
I
guess
what
will
come
out
counselor
cards,
it's
a
very
good
question
is
somebody
I'm
sure
when
we
get
back
into
examination
with
inspectors
is
going
to
be
putting
that
question
to
them.
Likewise,
we
know
that
the
the
implications
of
of
of
covid
on
the
economy-
and
other
considerations
will
no
doubt
be
be
aired
at
that
next
phase.
Whenever
we
get
to
it.
G
Thanks
chair
and
apologies,
if
there's
a
bit
of
noise
in
the
background,
the
the
joys
of
joining
remote
meetings
from
your
kitchen
table
at
t
time
does
mean
that
there
are
other
people
about.
I
just
wanted
to
clarify.
I
think
you
did
say
it
allison,
but
page
153,
paragraph
30.
It
just
says
our
intention
is
to
submit
the
addendum
as
soon
as
possible.
J
Yes,
so
in
our
response
to
the
inspectors
that
we
submitted
last
week,
which
is
now
published,
is,
I
think,
is
excyc.
43
we've
indicated
that
we
we'd
be
submitting
that,
hopefully,
in
early
november,
in
relation
to
the
greenbelt
topic
paper
addendum
at
the
updated
addendum
with
an
indication
of
the
how
we
would
be
revising
the
annexes
to
that
report
with
the
annexes
to
follow.
G
G
D
There
could
be,
but
how
many
years
away
that
would
be.
If
it
does
happen,
it
is
he's
really
hard
to
say.
Isn't
it
I
mean,
I
think,
in
terms
of
any
local
government
reorganizations-
and
I
I
worked
in
cheshire
before
cheshire-
was
local
government,
reorganization,
seven
districts
and
a
county
council
went
to
two.
D
D
G
D
F
D
D
Don't
forget
also
that
you
know
there
is
an
indication
from
mhclg
that
plans
should
be
reviewed
every
five
years
anyway.
So
that's
something
that
we
could
envisage,
although
where
you
have
a
green
belt,
then
you
would
perhaps
expect
that
green
belt
to
be
enduring
without
major
changes
for
most
of
the
length
of
a
planned
period.
D
A
B
Thank
you
chair.
I
was
intrigued
by
the
statement
20
on
top
of
page
151
last
sentence,
the
inspector
instructed
to
review
an
update
of
the
hra
should
be
undertaken
and
that
consultation
with
natural
england,
the
dio,
should
ensue
to
agree
a
statement
of
common
ground.
Now
my
discussions
with
the
dio
have
been
basically
on
the
grounds
that
they're
absolutely
adamant
that
the
strengths
of
barrack
sites
should
be
developed,
and
my
comp
conversations
with
natural
england
they're
pretty
adamant
that
it
shouldn't
be
developed
because
of
the
damage
to
the
common.
D
It's
likely
to
be
quite
a
short
document
because
there
isn't
a
great
deal
in
common,
so
the
the
bits
that
are
not
agreed
are
probably
going
to
be
a
longer
statement
and
the
bits
are
agreed,
but
it
does
just
the
sort
of
title
of
of
the
document
that
needs
to
be
submitted,
alice
and
perhaps
can
come
in
there.
I
suspect.
J
Maybe
longer
I
there
was
an
acknowledgement
by
the
inspectors
that
he
would.
He
would
like
to
see
what
the
dio
are
proposing,
what
we're
proposing
and
natural
england's
commentary,
alongside
that
he
did,
they
did
acknowledge
at
the
table.
That
may
be
more
of
a
statement
of
uncommon
ground
than
common
ground,
but
it
gives
a
basis
for
discussions
at
the
examination
session.
In
relation
to
the
evidence.
That's
been
submitted.
B
Yeah
the
effect
on
the
common
clearly,
the
site
st35,
has
been
taken
into
consideration
and
removed
from
the
plan,
has
great
consideration
being
given
to
the
sites
that
are
a
little
bit
further
away,
because
I
mean
I've
been
out
in
the
common
today,
and
I've
been
talking
to
people,
particularly
dog
walkers,
which
is
natural.
England's
main
concern
about
the
common
is
the
effect
of
dog
walking
on
the
comet.
B
I've
been
asking
people
where
they
come
from
and
they've
been
coming
from
all
over
york,
simply
because
strengths
of
common
is
about
12
square
kilometers,
of
open
space.
Where
you
can
take
dogs
and
ramble
for
miles.
Could
there
be
a
problem
with,
for
example,
with
a
site
north
of
hacksby,
which
is
very
close
to
stratocommon?
B
J
Thanks
mike
yes,
so
in
terms
of
how
we've
how
we've
looked
at
the
recreational
pressure
on
the
common
from
across
the
city
and
the
development
sites
in
the
in
the
local
plan,
that
was
the
issue
raised
in
our
in
our
original
submission
in
2018
by
natural
england
that
we
needed
to
understand
that
a
bit
more.
So
we
undertook
some
visitor
survey,
work
in
detail
across
the
common
and
that
details,
and
that
went
out
as
people
went
out
to
the
comment.
J
There
were
some
electric
counters
that
were
out
there
for
several
weeks
to
count
the
number
of
people
going
across
the
common.
There
were
people
also
doing
face-to-face
surveying
at
that
point
when,
when
we
were
allowed
to
do
face-to-face
serving
they
did
a
number
of
surveys
to
understand.
As
you
said,
where
people
are
coming
from,
why
they're
going
to
the
common?
How
long
they're
there?
What
routes
do
they
take?
Do
they
have
a
dog
that
was
a
critical
point
and
the
critical
point
about
dog
walking?
J
Is
that
because
it's
a
heath
land?
It's
that
it's
very
poor
soil
and
that's
what
makes
it
a
really
good
heathland
that,
ironically,
it's
got
poor
soil,
whereas
dogs,
us
and
dog
fouling
is
starting
to
enrich
not
to
go
into
too
much
graphic
detail,
but
in
rich
nutrient-wise,
the
soil
in
the
common.
Obviously,
it
changes
the
composition,
then
of
the
the
plant
species
and
habitats
that
that
are
on
site.
J
J
What
we
have
done
to
to
look
at
that,
so
we've
always
identified
that'd,
be
the
six
percent
uplift
and
recreational
pressure
as
a
result
of
the
other
developments
in
the
plan
and
what
the
new
hra
has
looked
at
in
more
detail.
Is
this
two
years
worth
of
data
and
how
we
should
be
then
looking
at
mitigating
those
through
the
other
policies
in
the
plan.
So
what
the
new
hra
will
be?
Looking
will
be
suggesting,
is
or
recommending
is
modifications
to
some
of
the
strategic
site.
J
So
there'll
be
we'll
be
working
with
the
developers
as
mike
said,
to
agree,
agree
that
ahead
of
the
next
phase
of
developments
as
we
would
be
working
with
the
dio
to
discuss
the
outcomes
of
the
report
in
terms
of
their
site,
but
that
work
as
well.
What
what
the
outcome
showed
is
that
the
the
recreational
pressure
uplift
is
much
more
acute
to
the
closer
to
the
common.
You
are
so
the
the
further.
D
A
I
would
recommend
to
members
who
haven't
read
that
survey
work
that
was
done
on
strengths.com.
It
is
a
particularly
fascinating
and
interesting
report
with
more
references
to
dogfowl
and
dog
yo
than
anything
I've
ever
seen
in
any
council
report
in
history.
It
was
a
fascinating
piece
of
topic.
Councillor
colwick.
H
Thank
you
chair.
I
I
think
I
probably
know
the
answer
to
this,
but
it
would
be
interesting
to
know
whether
any
any
assessment
has
been
possible
through
2020
and
the
uplift
that
would
have
been
created
through
the
the
months
of
the
pandemic,
because
the
use
of
stencil
common
has
only
increased
over
these
last
months
and
I'm
one
of
those
it
falls
into
the
category
of
living
on
the
north
side
of
york
and
visiting
the
common
quiet
quite
regularly.
H
J
We
haven't
undertaken
any
additional
survey
work,
but
we
do
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
anecdotal
evidence,
as
councillor
fischer
referred
to,
that,
there's
been
a
lot.
There's
been
an
uplift
in
people
attending
the
common
and
it's
something
to
think
about
in
terms
of
the
future
in
terms
of
a
monitoring
regime,
potentially
of
visitor
pressure
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
the
what's
happening
as
a
result
of
development
in
the
city
and
and
the
increase
as
well
as
what's
happening
now.
As
a
res
on
the
common.
A
B
I
can
say
through
having
been
on
the
common
virtue.
Every
day
for
2
hours,
there
has
been
a
huge
increase.
It's
been
an
absolute
godsend
for
the
people
of
strenzel.
Unfortunately,
the
vast
majority
of
people
have
behaved
extremely
responsibly,
particularly
because
they've
mostly
been
locals,
who
know
the
common
the
know
the
damage
it
can
done.
It
can
can
be
done
to
it,
and
I
haven't
seen
a
significant
uptake
in
dock
fouling
and
harassment
of
other
animals
has
been
a
little,
but
not
as
much
as
might
have
been,
but
no,
the
common
has
been
absolute.
A
It's
just
here
for
noting,
I
think,
there's
a
sort
of
a
bit
of
a
background.
I
did
become
consciously
aware
of
his
chair
that
was
being
in
the
examination
process,
there's
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
with
the
with
the
planning
inspector
and
that
information
gets
posted
by
law
onto
the
the
council
website,
and
so
it's
not
an
ideal
way
of
transparency.
So
this
was
a
way
of
sort
of
trying
to
say
well,
we'll
we'll
do
as
much
as
we
can
to
get
the
information
to
the
local
plan
working
group
at
cancer
taylor.
A
G
A
A
J
So
most
of
the
the
important
updates
are
on
the
face
of
the
of
the
webpage,
but
it
there
are
other
documents
that
aren't
placed
in
those
updates,
so
we're
directed
as
to
the
murdering
wording
that
can
go
on
the
web
page.
So
it's
always
worth
checking
the
actual
examination
library
itself
in
terms
of
the
update,
so
I've
attached
to
you
for
you,
the
7th
of
october
version
to
this
report,
we're
now
up
to,
I
think,
there's
been
two
additional
updates
since
then.
A
M
M
A
D
1948
version
as
a
pdf,
I
think
yeah
happy
to
look
at
that,
but
the
first
priority
I
think
for
alison
and
the
you
know
the
small
team
is
to
is
to
get
this
stuff
submitted,
but
happy
to
do
that.
But
one
of
the
problems
again
is
that
this
is
sort
of
semi-legal
stuff
that
you
have
to
some
other
things.
You
can't
avoid.
You
know
the
statement
of
common
ground,
for
example,
even
if
it's
a
statement
that
we
don't
agree
with,
somebody
still
has
to
be
called
a
statement
of
common
ground.
D
So
there
are
some
things
that
are.
You
know,
unfortunately
counselor
taylor
outside
our
sort
of
direct
control
that
we
have
to
make
sure
that
we
we
follow,
do
sort
of
legal
process
and
mhclg
guidance
on
on
these
things,
but
happy
to
take
that
away
to
to
have
a
have
a
look
at
it,
but
I
think
it's
just
how
far
back
we
go.
I
think
probably
keeping
things
up
to
date
and
the
way
the
next
steps
might
be
the
the
first
thing.
Obviously,
people
have
researched
it
as
counselor
air
says
you
know.
A
Did
get
something
to
do
all
that
whether
anybody
would
agree
what
happened
at
every
particular
stage
might
be
another
challenge.
I
think
I'll
give
it
away.
Maybe
if
we
can
find
a
retired
planning
officer
like
that
yeah
yeah,
I
left
the
authority
about
six
or
seven
years
ago
and
retired.
They
might
be
interested
in
doing
that,
one,
okay!
So
taking
that
on
board,
are
we
all
happy
to
to
note
the
report?