►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
afternoon
everybody
and
welcome
to
this
remote
meeting
the
development
plan
panel.
My
name
is
carson.
Neil
warshaw
and
I
will
be
chairing
today's
meeting.
Just
gonna
go
through
my
preamble
discussion
as
normal
folks.
So
just
bear
with
me.
A
So
I'd
like
to
start
the
meeting
day
by
confirming
the
meeting
is
of
development
plan
panel
meets
requirements
of
the
council's
constitution,
even
though
members
of
the
panel
are
in
remote
attendance,
while
items
today
will
be
fully
discussed
as
usual,
remote
attendance
requires
a
few
slight
changes
to
how
I
manage
the
debate.
A
Therefore,
as
as
you
all
know,
folks,
can
you
mute
your
microphones
unless
you're
speaking,
can
you
keep
your
cameras
running
please,
and
all
participants
will
be
invited
to
reduce
themselves
and
start
the
public
session
to
make
it
clear
to
public
observers
who
will
be
involved
in
proceedings.
A
A
My
web
hub
is
currently
supporting
this
meeting
and
two
other
zoom
meetings,
so
this
could
could
go
right
at
any
moment
and
I'd
like
to
oppose
a
deputy
chair
as
we
normally
do,
so
I
propose
councillor
richie
and
can
somebody
for
me
second
that
motion
please.
A
Much
appreciated
council
grocery
council
richie
is
our
deputy
chair
for
his
sins.
So
I'm
going
to
now
do
introductions
so
I'll
start
with
kelsey
anderson.
A
D
Thanks
chair
under
gender
item
number
one:
there
are
no
appeals
against
the
refusal
of
inspection
of
documents
under
agenda
item
number
two:
there
are
no
items
which
require
the
exclusion
of
the
press
and
public
under
gender
item
number
three.
There
are
no
formulated
items
of
business
to
do
and
under
agenda
item
number.
Four
police
can
ask
members
to
declare
any
disposable
pecu
in
your
interest.
E
Chair
and
thank
you
later
on
we'll
be
discussing
perhaps
a
policy
change
in
relation
to
leads
of
radford
airport.
I
am
a
member
of
the
plans
panel,
which
will
be
making
a
decision
on
their
planning
application.
E
C
E
A
And
I
I
too,
as
chair
of
dpp,
I
sit
on
city
plans
panel
as
a
member,
and
also
I
too
have
not
made
my
mind
up.
Mr
ellie.
You've
got
your
hand
up.
H
Yes,
chair
just
just
to
confirm
for
clarity
at
this
stage
that
the
the
the
paper
of
which
the
airport
is
is
a
part,
is
around
the
scope
of
policies
to
be
reviewed
within
the
local
plan.
Update
no
decision
has
been
taken
or
direction
of
travel
as
to
what
those
policies
may
or
should
look
like
this
is
simply
about
including
them
and
opening
them
up
for
consultation.
As
part
of
that
scoping
document.
A
A
I
know
you'll
have
read
them,
so
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
them
page
by
page,
but
are
there
any
matters
arising
for
the
3rd
of
november
I'll
just
bring
my
screen
back
from
a
word
document,
and
if
there
are
no
matters
rising,
can
I
have
someone
to
move
those
as
a
true
record
member
sure?
Thank
you,
council
mckenna,
seeing
nods
much
appreciated
and
therefore
are
there
any
matters
arising
when
we
turn
to
the
minutes
of
the
11th
of
december
and
I'll
go
back
to
sure.
D
J
Hand
my
hand
function
to
work
just
for
those
minutes
for
the
11th
of
december.
Could
I
request
two
alterations,
please,
if
possible,
yeah
on
page
16
in
the
hmo
section?
The
second
bullet
point
reads:
whilst
the
sbd
relates
to
new
conversions,
only
that
that
should
instead
read
whilst
the
sbd
relates
to
new
applications
for
hmos,
only
I'm
happy
to
send
this
through
to
to
sasha,
if
that's
helpful,
just
further
down
the
page.
Finally,
the
second
to
last
bullet
point.
J
The
third
line
reads
with
effect
from
the
first
of
july:
2021,
that's
in
error,
and
this
should
read
the
6th
of
april
2021.
I
apologize
to
panel
that
this
wasn't
picked
up
early,
but
hopefully
that
clarification
helps.
A
H
A
H
It
is
chair,
yes,
just
just
in
terms
of
matters
arising.
I'm
sure
members
of
the
panel
will
be
aware
that
the
site
allocations
plan
proposed
modifications
for
remittal,
in
line
with
the
high
court
order,
has
now
commenced
its
consultation
period
for
for
six
weeks.
A
A
I
love
them
chap.
Thank
you.
Council
mckenna,
hopefully
you're
all
gonna
liven
up
soon.
So
if
we
then
turn
to
gender
item,
seven,
which
is
our
local
plan
update
and
as
you
as
you
well
know,
we're
midway
through
our
locker
plan
review,
which
has
got
a
climate
emergency
focus,
so
adam's
gonna
provide
the
latest
further
update
on
that.
So
over
to
adam.
J
Thank
you
chair.
Sorry,
just
let
me
make
sure
everything's
visible
is
my
audio
okay,
can
you
all
hear
me
and
you
can
all
see
the
presentation-
all
great
great
stuff,
there's
a
few.
I
just
want
to
say:
there's
a
few
colleagues
joining
us
that
you'll
have
noticed
here.
We've
got
paul
bingham
nazarene
eunice
is
obviously
going
to
do
a
is
presenting
the
second
item
as
well.
We've
got
caroline
harris,
catherine
holloway
and
we've
got.
I
can't
see
the
full
list,
I'm
sorry
who's
on
the
screen.
J
If
we've
got
anyone
else
to
do,
we've
got
helen
miller
as
well.
Just
just
saying
these.
These
are
the
the
authors
a
lot
of
these
these
topic
areas
and
for
any
detailed
questions
that
members
may
have
I'm
happy
to
bring
those
those
in
to
be
able
to
respond
to
any
detail
inquiries.
So
I
just
wanted
to
introduce
you
all
to
those
colleagues.
J
J
J
Following
those
helpful
discussions
at
dpp
in
november,
we're
working
on
consultation
papers
on
these
topics
to
aid
consultees
and
sharing
their
views
on
the
scope
of
the
plan.
J
Sorry,
whilst
the
I'm
just
going
to
skip
through
sorry,
whilst
the
consultation
papers
themselves
will
likely
run
between
so
10
to
12
20
pages,
each
we're
developing
plans
on
a
page
for
each
topic
area,
which
will
help
simplify
the
material
and
focus
on
the
key
messages.
And
this
is
this-
is
a
draft
of
a
plan
on
a
page
from
the
carbon
reduction
section,
so
that
obviously
considers
the
reducing
emissions
from
developments
in
renewable
energy
generation.
J
So
it's
just
a
way
of
trying
to
present
these
things
in
a
bit
more
of
an
easily
readable
way,
we're
very
conscious
of
comments
that
have
quite
rightly
been
made
about
plain,
english
and
the
use
of
use
of
that,
so
that
you
know
local
people
can
get
properly
involved.
In
that
we
thought
that
plan
on
the
page
might
be
a
better
way
of
trying
to
synthesize
some
of
these
perhaps
somewhat
complicated
issues.
J
So
hopefully
that's
helpful
just
going
backwards.
The
the
new
topics
for
discussion
that
we
haven't
covered
so
far
and
they're
still
very
important
part
of
the
council's
response
to
the
climate
emergency,
and
these
are
flood
risk,
strategic
place-making
and
by
which
we
mean
the
sustainable
growth
of
the
city,
largely
in
line
with
the
20-minute
neighbourhood
concept
and
we're
proposing
to
merge
this
topic
with
the
detailed
design
aspect
of
place
making.
J
So
we're
considering
place,
making
it
both
the
district-wide
level,
all
the
way
down
to
the
site
level
as
a
sort
of
a
whole
continuation
of
place
making,
because
we
believe
that
that
is
all
place
making
just
at
different
levels.
So
we're
describing
that
sort
of
district-wide
level
as
strategic
place,
making
and
sustainable
infrastructure
which
includes
the
topics
of
hs2
and
leeds
station,
mass
transit,
digital
infrastructure
and
connectivity
and
leeds
bradford
airport.
J
J
So
the
first
is
is
flood
risk.
Hopefully,
members
will
recognize
some
of
those
those
images,
although
not
happy
memories,
obviously,
firstly,
avoiding
development
in
flood
risk
areas.
Leeds
has
a
strong
policy
framework
for
avoiding
flood
risk
areas
where
possible,
and
this
is
based
on
a
sequential
approach
which
requires
applicants
to
consider
reasonable
alternative
sites
in
a
lower
flood
risk
zone
and
for
sites
in
a
high
flood
risk
zone.
J
The
applicant
may
also
have
to
pass
the
exceptions
test,
demonstrating
that
the
benefits
of
the
scheme
outweigh
the
flood
risk
and
the
development
will
be
safe
over
its
entire
life.
There's
a
strategic
flood
risk
assessment
defines
flood
risk
for
the
whole
district
and
provides
advice
on
managing
it.
It
also
informs
the
policy
approach
taken
in
the
local
plan
last
updated
in
2007.
The
sfra
is
now
in
need
of
an
update
to
take
account
of
climate
change
projections,
the
flooded
alleviation
scheme
and
revised
environment
agency
guidance.
J
This
process
has
begun
and
it
is
hoped
that
the
new
sfra
will
be
completed
by
the
summer
as
a
result
of
climate
change.
We
know
that
the
risk
and
incidence
of
flooding
is
increasing.
Part
of
the
council's
response
has
been
to
invest
in
flood
alleviation
schemes
as
we
know,
but
as
part
of
this
consultation.
It's
also
important
that
we
review
our
existing
policies
and
consider
stakeholder
views
on
whether
we've
got
the
balance
right
on
development
in
flood
risk
areas
and
explore
options
for
how
improvements
could
be
made.
J
Functional
floodplain,
our
current
policy
in
the
natural
resources
and
waste
local
plan
is
to
save
guard
land
for
flood
storage,
as
shown
in
the
sfra.
In
those
areas,
only
water
compatible
uses
an
essential
infrastructure
is
permitted.
As
said
earlier,
we
are
currently
updating
the
sfra,
and
this
will
have
a
critical
role
to
play
in
defining
the
extent
of
the
functional
floodplain.
J
As
part
of
the
consultation
we're
keen
to
explore
views
and
the
function
on
the
role
of
the
functional
floodplain,
where
the
changes
should
be
made
to
this
in
urban
areas
and
how
this
should
be
managed,
surface
water,
flooding
and
sustainable
drainage,
as
members
will
be
well
aware,
suds
can
have
an
enormous
benefit
in
managing
surface
water
flooding,
including
reducing
flash
flooding,
reducing
pollutants
entering
local
watercourses,
improving
amenity
for
local
residents
and
creating
new
habitats
for
wildlife.
J
This
topic
relates
to
the
management
of
water,
in
particular,
surface
runoff,
but
also
to
the
management
of
nature,
the
loss
of
front
gardens
to
tarmacking
or
artificial
grass
and
paving
can
have
negative
impacts
on
flood
risk
by
increasing
the
speed
of
surface
runoff
that
would
otherwise
drain,
naturally
into
the
ground.
J
This
is
a
complicated
topic
as
existing
committed
development
rights
allow
for
the
paving
over
of
driveways
without
planning
consent.
However,
through
consultation,
we
are
keen
to
explore
how
we
could
limit
permitted
development
rights
on
new
developments
to
maintain
the
use
of
porous
materials
as
well
as
soft
and
natural
landscaping.
In
addition,
we
would
like
to
explore
options
for
controlling
existing
development
too,
although
this
is
likely
to
be
much
more
challenging.
J
It's
important
to
note.
I
apologize
this
isn't
reflected
in
the
report,
but
how
those
changes
are
are
managed
with
the
use
of
the
council's
enforcement
team,
given
existing
resources.
Obviously
a
significant
factor
and
something
we'll
need
to
bear
in
mind
as
we
embark
in
more
detail
in
on
this
consultation.
J
The
second
broad
topic
is
strategic
placemaking,
so
current
policies
in
the
plan
and
the
local
plan
across
all
development
plan
documents
seek
to
direct
development.
J
It's
the
most
sustainable
locations,
in
particular
the
core
strategy
settlement
hierarchy,
establishes
a
pattern
of
development
which
focuses
development
on
the
main,
open
area
and
major
settlements,
with
a
key
focus
on
brownfield
land
as
well
through
the
local
plan,
update
we're
keen
to
explore
how
we
guide
new
development
to
locations
that
offer
the
best
opportunity
for
active
travel,
the
use
of
public
transport
and
for
the
minimal
use
of
cars,
and
this
is
fully
in
line
with
the
draft
transport
strategy.
Currently
after
consultation,
it
is
important
to
clarify
this.
J
In
so
doing,
and
as
expressed
by
members
of
this
panel,
we
want
to
bring
our
policy
suite
in
line
with
the
20-minute
neighbor
concept.
As
far
as
we
can,
which
itself
aligns
really
well
with
a
range
of
existing
council
priorities,
including
creating
strong
communities,
inclusive
growth,
health
and
well-being
and
creating
sustainable
infrastructure
which
reduces
car
use.
J
We
want
to
use
the
planning
system
to
help
us
maximize
the
benefits
that
this
investment
presents
for
leads
and
minimize
any
potential
adverse
impacts.
Whilst
also
noting
that
many
aspects
of
hs2
are
not
controlled
through
local
planning
policy,
such
as
the
principle
of
the
development
or
its
route
at
present,
there
are
no
specific
policies
on
hs2
in
the
local
plan,
so
we're
proposing
to
include
one
which
could
help
guide
growth
of
lead
station,
identify
development
opportunities
associated
with
a
new
hs2
line,
maximize
opportunities
for
green
infrastructure
and
maximize
key
pedestrian
and
cycle
infrastructure.
J
Mass
transit
similar
to
hs2,
it
won't
be
for
the
local
plan
update
to
decide
on
the
principle
or
the
route
of
mass
transit.
This
is
a
project
led
by
the
west
georgia
combined
authority
in
conjunction
with
the
five
authorities
themselves,
however,
which
is
important.
Sorry,
it's
incon.
It's
considered
important
that
the
local
plan
update
does
provide
strategic
support
for
mass
transit
in
order
to
maximize
the
benefits
of
the
scheme,
such
as
integrating
green
infrastructure
and
active
travel.
J
At
least
bradford
airport,
as
members
will
recall,
and
as
noted
in
the
report
as
part
of
the
full
council
resolution
in
march
2019,
a
commitment
was
given
to
review
sp
12,
which
is
the
primary
policy
for
for
growth
of
the
airport.
It
is
important,
therefore,
as
part
of
the
local
plan
update
to
seek
views
on
how
the
policy
framework,
as
it
relates
to
the
airport
functions
and
any
views
on
how
that
could
be
improved,
should
be
captured
through
that
consultation.
J
And
finally,
as
a
topic,
we've
got
digital
infrastructure
of
the
sustainable
infrastructure
topics,
so,
given
how
working
life
has
transformed
over
the
last
few
years,
and
particularly
since
march,
the
need
for
reliable,
high-speed
internet
connecting
homes
and
businesses
is
more
important
than
ever.
Improving
this
digital
connectivity
also
has
an
important
role
to
play
in
reducing
the
need
to
travel
and
thus
reducing
emissions.
J
Lee
city
council's
full
fiber
network
program
is
a
key
strand
of
this.
However,
it's
also
important
to
assess
whether
local
plant
policy
can
go
further,
whilst
existing
policies
provide
general
support
for
improved
digital
connectivity.
We're
keen
to
enshrine
high
standards
for
new
development
to
ensure
that
technological
infrastructure
is
planned
from
the
outset
of
a
development.
J
J
It's
worth
repeating
the
nature
of
a
regulation,
18
consultation,
which
is
designed
to
agree
the
scope
of
a
plan.
So,
broadly
speaking,
that's
the
topics
and
policy
areas
that
the
authority
believe
should
be
addressed
by
the
plan.
It's
not
a
stage
where
detailed
policies
are
fully
worked
up.
Stakeholders
have
the
right
to
comment
on
that
scope
and
those
comments
will
then
be
carefully
considered
before
the
scope
is
set
and
detailed
policies
were
worked
up
further
and
then
we'll
have
further
consultation
on.
It's
obviously
been
endorsed
through
dpp.
J
So
far
that
the
proposed
scope
of
this
plan
is
how
planning
policy
can
be
used
to
help
address
the
climate
emergency.
The
most
likely
form
this
will
take
is
a
selective
update
of
the
existing
core
strategy
and
natural
resources
and
waste
plan
to
insert
relevant
new
policies
or
strengthened
existing
ones.
So
just
to
clarify
it's
not
the
poll,
it's
not
the
purpose
of
the
update
to
revise
all
policies
or
to
amend
existing
allocations
or
to
create
a
new
document.
J
The
rest
of
the
plan
will
be
left
as
currently
adopted
until
future
reviews
so
finally,
on
to
next
steps.
So
I
set
out
in
power
1.4
of
the
report
over
the
next
few
weeks,
we're
looking
to
complete
the
the
five
consultation
papers,
and
these
will
be
presented
to
dpp
on
the
second
of
march
for
comments
before
approval
is
sought
to
consult
on
them
at
executive
board
on
the
17th
of
march.
J
A
Thanks
elvis
on
point
and
excellent,
thank
you
so
much,
I'm
just
scribbling
some
notes
myself.
Just
just
as
a
you
I'm
about
to
ask
a
question.
You
can't
answer.
So
it's
a
good
start.
So,
theoretically,
the
cabinet
office
has
indicated
that
the
local
elections
will
be
in
may,
but
obviously
that
might
change,
but
it
would
be
my
opinion.
A
I
think
that
we,
I
wouldn't
want
the
local
plan
review
to
be
delayed
by
potential
delaying
elections
and
that's
that's
an
area
of
concern,
but
it's
not
I'm
airing
it
now,
because
I
think
it's
probably
been
on
members
minds
as
well,
because
things
may
change,
I
mean
things
are
rather
fluid
at
the
moment.
Aren't
they
in
terms
of
how
our
government
is
conducting
itself
now?
A
The
view
at
the
moment
is
their
elections
are
to
go
ahead
in
on
in
may,
but
that
may
change,
but
I
don't
I
don't
know
what
other
members
think,
but
changing
our
consultation
schedule
puts
back
the
local
plan
review
and
time
is
rather
of
the
essence,
and
it
is
to
put
it
bluntly,
into
public
forum.
Colleagues,
it
is
looking
at
climate.
Emergency
is
perhaps
not
the
most
controversial
topic.
Planning's
touched
in
recent
years.
Some
housing
helicopters
would
have
been
mother
more
controversial.
So
I
don't
know
what
other
members
think
in
that
regard.
A
But
that's
that's.
It's
not
really
a
question.
You
can
answer
adam.
It's
just
I
just
wanted
to
to
air
it
as
a
point
to
get
across
so
rather
than
you
coming
in.
To
answer
that,
I
want
to
bring
in
my
speakers,
so
I've
got
cancer
anderson's
the
first
member
to
put
his
hand
up,
but
mr
feeney
was
that
a
question
related.
A
I
You
know
we
are
seeking
to
move
the
process
forward
and
doing
that
technical
work,
as
we've
been
asked
to
do
through
this
panel,
I
mean
clearly
we'll
we'll
keep
going
if,
if
circumstances
change-
and
that
needs
to
be
adjusted
in
terms
of
the
timing
of
any
consultation,
then
that
will
have
to
be
reviewed
at
that
time.
I
think,
certainly
for
the
time
being,
given
the
imperative
that
dpp
has
set
down.
I
We
are
wanting
to
to
continue
as
per
what
we've
been
discussing
here
yeah,
so
I
would
much
rather
we
kept
things
on
track
and
then,
if
we
had
to
defer
the
consultation,
then
at
least
the
technical
work
has
been
done,
and
then
we
can
commence
that
at
the
appropriate
time,
rather
than
delaying
the
technical
work
in
case,
we
can't
consult
at
the
current
scheduled
time
if
that
makes
sense
chair.
Thank
you.
A
C
I
can
I
first
of
all
say
I
welcome,
what's
here,
what's
been
proposed
here
today,
just
a
number
of
questions
surrounding
it,
taking
the
flooding
one.
First
of
all
again,
this
is
in
respect
of
my
ward.
I've
had
three
major
problems
with
flooding
and
the
mitigation
of
it,
and
one
of
the
issues
that
we
have
is
that
we
don't
actually
have
the
expertise
in
house
in
order
to
deal
with
professionals
who
are
arguing
against
developments.
C
So
is
there
any
way
that
we
can
get
the
policies
written
in
such
a
way
that
the
level
of
challenge
by
professionals
compared
with
what
the
resource
we've
got?
I
think
that
it
is
a
concern.
It
is
a
concern
that,
and
subsequently
it's
been
proved
because
the
areas
have
flooded
and
residents
say
well,
we
did
say
this
was
going
to
happen,
but
we
didn't
have
the
in-house
expertise
to
argue
against
it,
and
the
other
thing
is
on
the
removal
of
permitted
development
rights
for
new
developments.
C
Fine,
no
problem
with
that
in
principle.
However,
I
know
I've
argued
in
the
past
that
we're
building
far
too
many
new
houses,
but
the
number
of
new
houses,
as
a
percentage
of
our
total
housing
stock,
is
actually
quite
small,
and
the
major
problem
is
actually
retrofitting
a
lot
of
the
houses
that
we've
already
had
approved,
and
I'm
told
one
way
of
doing
this
is
an
article
for
direction.
C
Do
we
mean
20
minutes
by
walking
or
by
car?
The
reason
being?
If
you
take
the
outer
northeast
as
an
area,
you
know
well,
for
a
start,
you
could
be
difficult
to
20
minutes
and
you
would
walk
into
the
middle
of
the
countryside,
so
you
would
need
cars
and
that
then
becomes
contrary
to
the
council's
transport
strategy
in
terms
of
getting
people
to
use
public
transport
more.
So
I
think
we
need
a
bit
of
clarity
as
to
when
we
say
a
20-minute
connectivity.
C
Should
we
be
saying
what
can
and
cannot
be
covered
by
this
consultation,
because
again,
whether
we
like
it
or
not,
the
national
aviation
policy
is
set.
Now
you
know
nationally,
even
if
we
as
a
council
had
a
view
and
then-
and
we
all
agreed
on
that
particular
view,
because
there
is
a
national
policy,
you
know
some
people
would
might
think.
Well,
I
want
to
raise
this.
I
want
this
in
the
policy,
but
we
can't
actually
do
it
because
it's
actually
a
national
issue.
So
how
do
we
get
around
these
particular
points?
A
Thanks
karen
anderson
yeah,
when
I
was
talking
about
down
my
notes
for
this
meeting,
one
of
the
first
things
I
wrote
was
the
tension
between
local
and
national
policies
and
and
the
airport
does,
does
bring
that
to
the
four
there's
a
lot.
We
can't
alter
on
that
regarding
to
what
members
say
or
can't
say
it
might
be,
an
idea
to
bringing
legal
at
this
point
just
to
remind
us
what
our
responsibilities
are.
Nicole,.
D
Yeah,
it's
no
problem,
I
think
perhaps
colleagues
from
planning
might
be
able
to
help
better,
because
from
my
understanding
of
what
this
particular
report
covers,
it
doesn't
go
into
or
or
or
straddle
across,
if
you
like,
the
issues
that
are
before
before
the
local
plan
authority
in
relation
to
the
planning
application.
D
So
that's
the
best
I
can
advise
with
regard
to
the
actual
planning
application
before
before
the
council.
I
think
it
does
depend
on
the
scope
of
what
the
policy
is
likely
to
cover
and
now,
as
mr
elliott
explained,
the
beginning
of
the
meeting,
we're
not
into
the
scope
of
the
particular
policies,
but
maybe
the
planning
colleagues
can
help
out
further
as
to
what
the
actual
scope
is
going
to
be.
So
the
members
have
a
better
idea
for
the
purposes
of
this
debate.
H
That
policy
is
open
to
update
through
the
the
local
plan
update,
but
as
yet
no
direction
of
travel
has
been
set
for
that,
and
what
this
is
doing
is
this
is
receiving
comments
and
suggestions
through
public
consultation
on
that,
and
it's
important
then,
to
set
out
that
the
weight
to
be
attached
to
any
emerging
policy
will
very
much
depend
on
the
level
of
objection
that
that
emerging
policy
has
received
throughout
its
various
public
consultations.
H
So
at
this
stage,
given
that
it
is
simply
scope,
it
will
be
difficult
to
ascertain
what
the
the
direction
and
therefore
weight
to
be
attached
to
that
scope
is,
but
when
it
gets
to
draft
policy
status,
which
will
be
the
next
formal
part
of
the
the
local
plan
update
plan
making
process
and
the
council
approves
a
revised
policy
at
that
stage.
That
revised
policy
can
have
some
draft
weight.
H
But
as
I
say,
that
will
depend
very
much
on
its
accordance
with
national
policy
and
the
level
of
objections
and
the
nature
of
objections
that
have
been
received
on
it.
A
Okay,
that
that's
useful,
that's
peaceful
marketing,
because
we're
effectively
commenting
on
the
scope
rather
than
specific
details
germain
to
any
application.
So
that's,
that's.
That's
quite
helpful.
Isn't
it
so?
Hopefully
that's
clarified
things
for
members.
On
that
basis,
my
next
speaker
was
so.
A
J
In
terms
of
in
terms
of
the
kind
of
flood
mitigation
issues,
obviously
we
we
have
flood
risk
management.
Colleagues
who
who
are
experts
in
their
field,
and
we
we
work
with
those
those
closely
in
terms
of
how
we
write
policies
to
ensure
a
a
an
easy
understanding
and
and
robustness.
Well,
that's
that's
the
challenge
of
all
policy.
J
Writing
isn't
it
and
I
think
we're
obviously
very
very
alive
to
that
very
aware
that
that
we
need
to
make
sure
those
policies
are,
are
easily
readable
and
don't
present,
perhaps
too
much
in
the
way
of
of
perhaps
backdoors,
but
at
this
stage
we're
not
talking
about
that
that
that
specific
detail,
yet
we're
we're
really
just
trying
to
grapple
with
the
concept
of
the
scope
of
this
plan
and
whether
these
issues
should
be
in
it
or
not.
J
You
raise
cancer
anderson,
the
issues
of
of
article
four
directions
and
ask
whether
the
council
is
considering
this
there's
a
as
you'll,
probably
aware,
there's
a
huge
amount
of
evidence
that
needs
to
go
in
to
creating
an
article
for
direction.
I
think
it's
too
early
to
say,
given
we
haven't
even
begun:
the
consultation
on
the
scope
of
this
plan
as
to
whether
the
council
is
considering
that
or
not.
J
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
is
get
views
back
from
stakeholders
and
see
what
what
what
direction
the
the
public
and
and
businesses
and
all
the
stakeholders
are
keen
for
us
to
take.
So
so
I
think
that
that
has
to
be
our
kind
of
open-minded
position
at
this
stage
in
terms
of
the
20-minute
neighborhoods
walking
or
by
car.
It's
it's
certainly
not
by
car.
It's
it's
about
walking,
cycling
and
public
transport
in
that
20-minute
area.
J
But
but
really
this
is
about
a
transition
away
from
reliance
upon
the
car,
but
we
we
are
obviously
aware
that
there
are.
There
are
lots
of
areas
in
the
outer
areas
of
leeds
that
don't
have
that
service
delivery
and
and
will
struggle
to
demonstrate
20-minute
neighborhoods,
and
I
think
that's
that's
an
issue
we
have
to
grapple
with
as
part
of
this
consultation.
What
does
it
mean
to
people
yeah
and
how
do
we
get
there?
I
think
we've
discussed
the
airport
issue
so
hopefully
that
addresses
you.
Your
questions
comes
from
listen.
C
Yeah,
the
only
question
I'd
ask
is
what
status
will
planning
applications
have
that
are
about
to
be
approved
over
the
next
few
months,
when
we
know
that
we're
most
likely
to
come
forward
with
a
policy
that
might
restrict
permitted
development
rights?
How
can
we
get
warding
put
into
these
planning
permissions
that
are
granted?
That
might
not
be
built
out
for
another
two
or
three
years,
and
so
people
are
getting
frustrated
that
you
know
new
restricts.
New
policies
are
being
brought
in,
but
we
don't
appear
to
be
able
to
apply
them
retrospectively.
J
Well,
nicole,
will
confirm
whether
or
writes
on
this
one
and
nikki
as
well,
but
the
I
think,
the
short
answer.
That
question
is
no.
We
can
only
use
the
policies
as
they
exist
in
the
adopted
local
plan
to
set
conditions
and
national
national
policies
set
conditions
for
for
current
applications.
J
As
you
know,
as
you
obviously
are
aware,
the
we're
so
early
at
the
stage
of
this
that
it's
going
to
be
some
time
before
policies
emerge
and
it's
only
when
they've
become
adopted
that
we'll
be
able
to
use
them
to
condition
development.
So
whilst
that
is
frustrating
that
it
means
that
perhaps
a
lot
will
be
approved
before
that
that
new
policy
comes
in
there
just
wouldn't
be
the
weight
behind
those
new
policies
to
justify
in
certain
conditions.
On
that
basis,
that
would
be
my
understanding
at
least.
A
H
Sure,
if,
if,
if
I
could
and
I'd
just
just
referring
back
to
the
to
the
answer,
I
I
gave
previously
that
there
will
be
some
weight
to
be
attached
once
the
policies
are
drafted,
which
will
be
the
the
next
regulatory
stage
after
this
which
we're
hoping
to
to
to
accelerate,
certainly
toward
the
end
of
this
year,
where
there
will
be
some
weight
and,
as
I
say,
depending
on
the
level
of
objection
at
that
consultation
point
and
depending
on
that
policy's
alignment
with
national
guidance.
H
So
that's
that's
the
first
routine,
a
clear
direction
of
travel.
The
second
element
to
this
is
that
these
new
policies
will
kick
in
both
in
terms
of
outline
permission
and
reserve
matters
permission
so
that
that
it
will
be
important
for
us
and
where
we're
considering
outline
planning
permissions
to
discuss
with
developers
and
notify
them
that
these
things
are
on
the
horizon.
So
this
better
quality
and
and
this
ratcheting
up
of
design,
quality
etc.
H
Will
kick
in
at
reserve
matters
stage,
so
that
they're
very
clear
from
the
off
that
they
are
planning
for
that
and,
secondly,
and
related
to
that.
It's
not
just
through
the
statutory
plan
that
we
can
exercise
these
policies.
We
we
can
encourage.
We
can
set
out
good
practice.
We
can
highlight
good
practice
and
we
can
also
work
with
developers
to
discuss
and
advocate
the
type
of
places
that
we
want
in
leeds.
H
I
think
a
lot
of
this
consultation
is
going
to
be
about
capturing
local
residents
views
as
to
what
is
what
what
does
the
place
they
want
to
live
in
in
the
future.
Look
like.
Does
it
look
like
what
you're
buying
now
or
does
it
look
slightly
better
than
that?
H
So
I
think
this
consultation
is
about
showing
people
what
that
better
might
look
like
in
a
leads
context,
and
I
think
those
things
together
alongside
heightening
the
existing
policies
that
we
already
have
do,
give
us
some
tools
to
be
able
to
to
get
this
agenda
underway
and
and
certainly
point
to
a
very
strong
direction
of
travel
for
it.
A
I
Just
quickly
chair,
it
was
just
to
say
that
the
other
factor
for
members
to
take
into
account
is
that,
within
the
context
of
the
planning
white
paper
and
the
national
changes
to
the
planning
system,
we
are
expecting
some
legislation.
I
think
it's
currently
planned
for
over
the
summer
in
terms
of
that
process.
Moving
forward
and
one
of
the
features
of
the
planning
white
paper,
as
members
will
recall
from
earlier
discussions
through
plans
panel,
was
to
set
national
dm
policies.
I
A
You
chet
yes
again,
thanks
dad!
That's
useful
council
collins.
F
Thank
you
chair.
I've
got
three
questions
or
points
to
raise.
The
first
two
are
the
smaller
ones.
The
first
one
is
a
water
runoff.
Can
I
have
some
assurance
from
officers
that
they
will
actually
looking
at
the
topography
of
areas
as
well,
not
just
looking
at
flat
maps.
We've
got
two
quite
significant
hills
in
horsforth,
we've
got
hunger
hills
and
the
building,
and
when
it
rains,
the
water
comes
gushing
down
the
hills.
F
So,
if
we're
going
to
have
some
review
of
what
mitigation
we
need
to
put
in
for
water
runoff,
I
think
we
also
need
to
make
sure
that
we
actually
look
at
worst
case
scenarios
within
the
city
as
well,
because
I
think
just
planting
trees
in
horstworth
one.
We
don't
own
the
land
where
the
trees
would
need
to
go
and
two
it
might
not
be
enough
on
its
own.
So
that's
my
first.
E
F
To
please
the
second
thing,
the
the
20-minute
neighborhoods
I
haven't
done
it,
but
I
just
want
to
be
sure
that
when
we
say
20
minutes
walking
distance
that
we
don't
contradict
ourselves
when
it
comes
to
the
primary
school
placements.
F
I
know
national
guidelines
say
that
small
children
shouldn't
be
expected
to
walk
more
than
a.
I
can't
remember
it's
a
kilometer
or
a
mile,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
that
those
distances
they
have
to
walk
to
their
primary
school
isn't
further
than
20
minutes
walk
away.
Otherwise
it
it
just
makes
us
look
a
bit
daft
when
we're
we're
applying
school
places,
you've
got
a
20-minute
community,
but
you've
actually
got
to
walk
outside
of
your
community
to
go
to
school.
F
So
some,
maybe
some
check,
needs
to
be
done
there,
but
the
more
more
concerned.
The
item
that
concerns
me
more
is
when
we
look
at
this
sustainable
infrastructure
list.
I
fully
appreciate
that
this.
This
consultation
has
been
brought
about
because
of
the
climate
emergency,
and
these
are
key
bullet
points
that
we
think
because
of
the
climate
emergency
things
need
to
be
brought
forward.
But
for
me
the
sustainable
infrastructure
list
is
missing
assessment
of
our
current
road
networks.
F
Our
main
arteries
are
already
clogged
and
are
going
to
get
more
and
more
clogged,
the
more
and
more
homes
any
and
even
businesses
get
built
in
the
city,
but
we
haven't
had
a
review
of
those
main
arterial
route.
I
raised
it
when
we
were
looking
at
the
site
allocation
plan
and
officers
kept
saying.
Oh
well,
we'll
do
that
afterwards,
counsellor.
F
I
seem
to
now
see
another
list
of
things
that
we
need
to
do.
When
I
ask
the
question
about
the
main
arterial
roots
again,
it
comes
oh
well,
we'll
look
at
that
after
I
mean.
Is
it
just
that
this
is
a
really
nasty
metal
to
grasp?
F
Why
isn't
there
something
in
the
sustainable
infrastructure
list
about
our
arterial
routes?
Thanks
chair.
A
A
Only
the
only
way
we're
going
to
get
the
road
infrastructure
more
sustainable
is
to
get
people
out
their
cars
and
onto
public
transport.
I
am
speaking
in
a
long
longer
term
post
covered
environment.
That's
the
way
to
do
it.
I
mean
there's,
not,
there's
not
a
huge
amount
of
scope
or
desire
from
the
administration
I
think,
to
for
further
road
building.
Apart
from
relieving
specific,
very
specific
problems
can.
F
A
F
Because
it's
I'm
not
asking
for
more
roads,
I
don't
I'm
not
saying
we
should
be
saying.
There's
another
road
coming
in
what
I'm
saying
is
we
haven't
looked
at
the
shortcomings
of
our
existing
roads
now
within
the
city
center.
There
are
the
robust
lanes
and
there
are
areas
where
you
could
see
that
over
a
short
distance,
a
bus
lane
might
be
improved.
But
when
you
get
out
to
places
like
horses,
we've
got
the
a65.
F
We've
got
the
ring
road,
but
there's
no
plan
for
those
two
major
roads
regarding
even
accommodating
a
bus
lane
and
if
you
just
put
in
a
bus
lane
at
the
moment
on
the
a65
without
actually
doing
any
further
works,
the
whole
thing
is
going
to
gridlock
with
regards
to
the
car.
We
we
can't
be
unrealistic
and
assume
that
if
we
swap
all
of
our
roads
for
bus
lanes
everybody's
going
to
leave
the
car
behind
so
so
this
that's
what's
concerning
me
is
on
the
wider
area
outside
the
city
center.
F
A
I
well
I
I
I
would
disagree
with
that
from
top
to
bottom.
I
think
the
approach
that
connecting
leads
have
laid
out
is
a
comprehensive
whole
corridor
approach
to
to
prioritizing
public
transport.
Cycling
active
travel
modes,
but
there
is
also
how
that
has
to
be
suffused
with
a
sense
of
budget
realism.
A
A
I
put
it
to
council
college
that
you
probably
wouldn't
tolerate
the
level
of
urban
change
that
I
would
take,
because
that
that
would
be
comprehensive.
Similarly,
strategic
bus
lanes
around
certain
other
points
around
the
city
would
involve
a
level
of
change
that
I
think
would
meet
with
some
resistance
communities.
It
doesn't
mean
we
shouldn't
do
them,
but
I
think
we
should
be
mindful
of
that,
that
that
is
something
that
we
would
have
to
to
address
as
a
as
a
as
a
council,
including.
F
That's
what
I'm
trying
to
say,
though
neil
is
the
moment
there
is
nothing,
no
plan,
no
discussion,
nothing
to
actually
present
to
the
residents
of
the
outer
communities
to
say
well
what
what,
if
we
considered
doing
this,
would
you
accept
it
or
not?
I
mean
you're,
making
a
big
assumption
there
that
we,
we
wouldn't
tolerate
anything
proposed,
but
let's
have
something
proposed
that
we
could
actually
then
discuss.
Not
just
keep
avoiding
the
issue.
F
I
mean
I'm
talking
about
the
a65
from
the
hawksworth
road
at
the
boundary,
with
kirkstall
up
through
new
roadside,
whether
you've
got
shops
on
either
side,
then
over
the
horse,
first
roundabout
and
then
up
the
hill
towards
geisley
up
from
the
roundabout
up
the
hill
towards
geisler
there's
potential
to
put
something
in
there.
But
but
we
don't
even
have
a
plan.
We
don't
even
have
an
idea
as
to
what
officers
might
propose
for
that
area
and
that's
what
I'm
saying
is
missing.
A
Yeah
it
well,
I
mean
the
connecting
leads
program
is
into
phases,
and
I
can't
picture
off
the
top
of
my
head
right
now
as
to
what
phase
that
out
to
reach
the
a65
corridor
are
in,
but
I
mean,
if
that's
not
there
already,
it
will
come
in
due
cost,
but
there's
also
there's
also
a
certain
amount
of
budget
realism.
A
I
would
suggest
into
to
these
approaches
and
that's
unfortunate,
but
after
10
years
of
local
government
austerity
and
then
the
government
hanging
us
out
to
drive
during
the
cove
due
to
the
financial
impacts
they
covered
pandemic.
A
You
know
we
are
going
to
have
to
be
mindful
of
getting
the
most
out
of
every
public
pound
we
have
and
how
we
spend
it
at
that
point.
Actually
given,
given
the
issues
we've
raised
and
with
all
due
respect
to
councillor
campbell,
it's
probably
a
good
point
to
bring
in
council
mulherin
as
the
exec
board
member
and
then
council
campbell.
Thank
you
for
being
so
patient,
colin
lisa.
L
Thank
you
chair.
I
actually
raised
my
hand
to
raise
some
other
issues.
Ebay
means
those
the
issues
I
was
gonna
raise
or.
A
L
So,
first
of
all,
in
terms
of
the
connecting
leads
clearly,
the
main
aims
of
that
particular
scheme
were
to
deliver
on
the
local
public
transport
improvement
programme.
L
We
have
already
over
programmed
that's
those
schemes
and
in
terms
of
the
funding
that
was
available
within
the
envelope
and
time
scales,
the
delivery
of
that
they're
all
pretty
much
out
to
delivery.
Now
we
have
got
a
number
of
other
schemes
that,
because
it
was
over
programmed
we're
seeking
alternative
funding
for
so
both
corridor
improvement
programme
through
wiki
and
the
transforming
cities
fund
are
delivering
some
further
elements
of
those
schemes.
L
But
there
are
obviously
in
the
size
and
scale
of
the
city
of
leeds
areas
that
we
will
have
to
come
to
through
further
schemes
later
down
the
line,
and
that's
literally
just
because
of
the
sheer
scale
of
the
challenge
that
we
have.
As
the
prime
minister
noted
both
last
summer
when
he
was
running
for
leadership
of
the
conservative
party
and
during
the
general
election
campaign
last
year.
L
Leeds
remains
the
largest
european
city
without
a
mass
transit
system,
and
that
is
essentially
the
big
issue
that
we
all
have
in
terms
of
delivering
the
sort
of
public
transport
improvements
and
the
congestion
relieving
improvements
that
we
need
to
see
for
leads,
and
that's
that's
essentially
where
we
need
to
be
so.
We've
got
a
transport
strategy
which
we
are
consulting
on
at
the
moment,
which
does
include
proposals
from
mass
transit
system,
but
to
be
able
to
deliver
that.
We
need
the
governments
to
deliver
on
their
promises
and
they
go.
L
The
premise
was
very,
very
clear,
not
only
last
summer
when
he
was
running
for
leadership,
the
conservative
party
and
during
the
general
election
campaign,
but
also
at
the
queen's
speech
after
the
general
election
last
year
that
there
was
a
need
to
deliver,
and
he
specifically
mentioned
leeds
in
the
queen's
speech
program
that
he
set
out
so
clearly,
we've
got
a
number
of
elections
coming
up
notwithstanding
the
concerns
that
the
chair
set
out
earlier
in
the
meeting
in
terms
of
whether
or
not
they'll
be
delayed
because
they're
pandemic.
L
Thank
you
so,
first
of
all,
in
terms
of
20-minute
neighbourhoods,
something
I
really
am
very
keen
to
support
and
see
progressed
in
leeds.
L
This
has
been
tried
a
number
of
other
large
cities
around
the
world
and
there's
some
really
good
examples.
Now
that
we
can
look
at
to
learn
from
what's
worked
well
elsewhere,
and
I
think
we're
really
good
for
members
of
plans
panels,
but
also
across
the
board
really
in
the
council
to
get
training
and
some
of
the
presentations
that
I've
seen
on
the
way
in
which
20
minute
neighborhoods
have
worked
elsewhere,
and
it
is
about
public
transport
as
well
as
active
travel,
so
walking
and
cycling.
L
It's
it's
not
just
that
you
can
walk
or
cycle
to
meet
on
your
daily
needs
within
20.
Minutes
of
your
home
is
including
public
transport.
So
I
think
that's
something
that
would
be
really
really
beneficial
for
us
to
to
have.
I
think
it's
a
consultation
on
the
local
plan.
L
For
me,
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
are
very
clear
what
lies
within
the
powers,
resources
and
responsibilities
of
local
governments
and
what
lies
within
the
powers,
resources
and
responsibilities
of
other
tiers
of
government,
whether
that's
west
york's,
combined
authority
or
mayoral
authorities.
It
could
be
or
national
government
and
I'm
I
think,
it's
particularly
important
to
emphasize
that
I
mean
we've
put
in
that
list
that
you
presented
adam
hs2
and
npr.
We've
seen
shifts
on
that
recently
and
seemingly
away
from
what
has
been
promised
to
us
previously
from
the
central
government.
L
We've
got
the
mass
transit
system
that
we
know.
We
need
that.
The
government
has
acknowledged
we
need,
but
which
will
be
led
from
west
yorkshire
rather
than
from
from
leeds.
Clearly
we
want
to
get
the
buy-in
from
the
public
to
help
to
get
the
resources
in
and
to
be
able
to
deliver
that,
but
it
will
be,
as
stated
previously,
a
west
yorkshire-led
scheme,
and
we
want
to
be
able
to
influence
that
and
where
those
routes
will
be,
but
it
won't
be
determined
here
and
then
in
terms
of
the
airport.
L
Again,
as
council
anderson
noted,
the
expansion
of
airports
up
and
down
the
country
is
not
controlled
by
local
authorities.
It's
controlled
by
national
aviation
strategy
and
the
growth
in.
L
L
Thinking
that
we
have
control
over
that
now,
we
have
to
determine
planning
applications
in
line
with
the
policies
that
are
set
nationally
and
I'm
very
keen
to
see
us
develop
our
own
local
policies
and
the
elements
that
we
do
have
control
over
in
line
with
the
climate
emergency
and
clearly
that's
something
that
we're
trying
to
set
out
in
the
scope
of
the
presentation
here
today,
but
that
difference
in
where
decisions
can
be
made
must
be
made
very
clear
in
the
consultation.
L
Otherwise,
the
public
are
going
to
be
very,
very
quickly
misled
in
terms
of
where
those
decisions
are
made
and
then
finally,
just
to
say,
I
think
all
of
us
are
really
appreciating
need
for
digital
infrastructure,
particularly
over
the
last
year,
and
certainly
those
chair
who
struggling
to
keep
our
broadband
going
with
our
own
meetings
and
homeschooling
simultaneously,
has
certainly
tested
my
broadband
capacity.
L
A
No
thank
you
such
a
really
helpful
set
of
comments.
I
mean
I
agree
entirely
so
that
the
consultation
document,
the
consultation
documents,
have
to
really
set
out
clearly
at
what
what
level
decision
making
is,
and
this
is
what
we
can
influence.
This
is
what
we
can.
This
is
what
we
can
make
decisions
upon,
and
this
is
also
but
then
this
is
what
we
can
influence
at
a
national
level
and
et
cetera.
So
that's
really
important
point.
A
Any
officers
wanting
to
come
back
on
that
and,
if
not
I'll,
move
to
council
campbell
who,
if
not
I'll,
move
to
council
campbell
who
has
been
ever
so
patient
and
then
after
councillor
campbell,
it's
councillor
arif
so
colin.
If
you
want
to
come
in,
please.
E
I
don't
think
it
really
matters
when
the
election
is
we're
we're
hoping
to
move
policy
on
to
cope
with
that,
to
cope
with
to
reflect
our
climate,
emergency
declarations
and-
and
actually
it's
always
easy
to
find
a
reason
for
not
doing
stuff,
but
actually
I
think
the
consultation
should
go
ahead
in
may
and
I'm
assuming
that
that's
what
we're
going
to
agree
today
on
a
couple
of
months.
Can
I
ask
some
specific
questions,
particularly
about
flooding.
E
You
know
artly
prone
to
flooding.
It's
raining
a
lot
at
the
moment
and
there's
a
flood
warning
out.
So
it's
a
subject
obviously
dear
to
our
dear
to
our
hearts.
E
Can
I
just
ask
a
couple
of
questions
because
we
talk
about
effectively
flood
zone
3a
and
flood
zone
3b
and
kind
of
yeah
three
b's
active
floodplain.
E
But
what
I'm
concerned
about
is
that
we
appear
to
be
saying
that
there
can
be
some
development
in
zone
3a
and
I
think,
actually
I
don't
think,
that's
a
good
idea,
because
these
are
areas
which
we
know
flood
and
the
consequential
issues
associated
with
that
are
problematic.
I
think
I
also
think
given
the
comment
which
is
in
somewhere
in
the
in
the
report,
which
says:
there's
a
measurable
increase
in
total
rainfall
talking
winter
rainfall
over
the
last
10
15
years.
E
I
think
I
like
the
idea
of
linking
strategic
and
local
place
making
together,
because
I
think
they
there's
a
synergy
there
and
the
infrastructure
is
always
one
that
will
create
some
discussion.
I
think
I
think
hs2
and
leeds
station
well
we'll
see
where
we
go
on
that,
because
I
understand
that
the
funding
on
all
the
rail,
in
particular
seems
to
have
been
cut
the
mass
transit
system.
Well,
I
I
can
recall
cher
when
I
first
became
a
member
of
leeds
city
council.
E
I
live
in
the
hope
that
before
I
leave
leeds
city
council,
I
actually
might
see
a
trap,
but,
as
you
say,
chair-
and
you
know,
the
road
capacity
is
what
it
is.
We
can't
increase
that
capacity
noticeably.
We
don't
want
to
increase
that
capacity.
Obviously,
so
the
only
alternative
is
a
public
transport
network
that
people
can
use
and
at
the
moment
we
haven't
got
one
we
haven't
had
one
for
some
considerable
time
and
hopefully
now
mass
transit's
reappeared
as
a
twinkle
in
somebody's
eye.
We
might
get
a
step
nearer.
E
E
The
the
final
point-
and
I
think
it's
something
that
perhaps
barry
touched
on
earlier
on,
which
is,
I
think,
it's
clear
to
the
members
of
the
this
group
anyway
and
I
think
to
most
of
the
council
about
the
direction
the
the
council's
traveling
in
in
relation
to
our
climate
emergency,
and
I
think
it
is
important
that
we
persuade
officers
to
now
be
slightly
more
proactive.
Perhaps
in
talking
to
developers
and
saying
this
is
where
it's
going.
E
E
Build-Outs-
and
I
I
wouldn't
want
this
to
get
to
a
situation
where
we
were
still
allowing
housing
developments
to
be
built
out
in
five
years
time,
which
were
nowhere
near
the
quality
and
that
we
would
require
within
a
new
development.
Thank
you,
chair.
A
Thanks
colin,
mr
mr
elliot
did
I
want
to
bring
offices
in,
but
mr
elliott
did
allude
to
the
fact
that,
as
soon
as
this
we've
got
stuff
out
to
con
drafts
ready
for
consultation,
then
those
strong
conversations
with
developers
will
be
happening
and
I'm
sure
officers
will
put
it
across
very
forcefully
in
terms
of
david
and
martin
and
the
team.
Do
you
want
to
come
back
on
the
points
raised
by
council
campbell.
J
Yeah
I'll
do
that.
That's
okay,
counselor!
Well
sure
I
mean
just
thanks
for
the
comments
of
council,
campbell
and
mulher
and
collins
they're
all
they're,
all
very
helpful.
J
I
think
in
particular
in
relation
to
the
question
counselor
campbell
raises
about
about
flood
risk
in
a
sense
part
through
the
consultation
may
can
explore
ideas
of
whether
we
should
be
extending
zones
of
3b
and
it
may
be
coming
out
of
the
sfra
that
that's
something
that
we
need
to
look
at
as
you
as
you
reflect
that
they
can
be
really
helpful
in
managing
flood
risk
and
deliberately
setting
aside
land
for
that
purposes
is
very
useful
in
terms
of
the
point
about
3a.
Should
we
stop
developments
in
3a?
J
That's
that's
where
the
question
of
balance
comes
in,
because
obviously
we
need
to
recognize
that
large
parts
of
the
city
center
are
in
zone
3a
and
when
we
balance
access
to
services
and
facilities,
those
areas
may
very
well
meet
aspects
like
the
20-minute
neighborhood
really
well,
but
also
be
in
higher
zones
for
flood
risk.
J
So,
there's
a
really
delicate
balance
that
needs
to
kind
of
take
place
there,
and
I
think
that's
something
that
we're
very
aware
of
and
we're
keen
to
to
get
views
on,
because
the
alternative,
I
suppose,
is
to
push
development
further
out
and
obviously
away
from
those
flood
risk
zones,
but
they
may
also
be
areas
that
don't
have
particularly
great
services.
Now,
that's
a
very
generic
statement.
There
may
be
lots
of
exceptions
to
that,
but
that's
the
balance
that
we're
trying
to
strike
here.
J
In
terms
of
I
think
the
last
point
about
discussions
with
developers.
I
think
that's
something
that's
going
to
be
really
important.
When
we
go
out
to
consultation,
I
think
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
engaging
properly
with
developers
we've
as
a
result
of
different
inquiries.
We've
tried
to
kind
of
raise
the
issue
of
this
that
we're
aware
of
it
through
this
panel.
You
know
that
some
of
them
will
be
tuning
in
today.
J
I
don't
I
dare
say,
and
you
know
I
think
a
lot
of
developers
are
keen
to
to
do
this
work
and
we've
seen
a
lot
of
good
work
from
from
developers.
I
think
it's
about
bringing
the
whole
whole
group
of
developers
forward
with
this,
so
yeah
you're,
absolutely
right,
council
campbell,
we
need
to.
We
need
to
bring
developers
with
us
we're
keen
to
do
that.
E
E
You
know
nobody's
seriously
suggesting
that
we
stop
all
development
in
holby
can
turn
it
into
the
flood
zone
for
for
leads.
So
we're
realistic
about
that,
and
I
think,
within
areas
that
are
already
developed,
you
have
to
have
a
slightly
different
approach
just
to
areas
where
currently
there
is
no
development,
and
I
would
assume.
E
A
Okay
yeah:
it's
noted,
counselor
arith.
D
Thanks
chair
just
following
on
from
councillor
mulherin
and
council
coin
in
relation
to
digital
infrastructure,
I
fully
support
that,
because
the
pandemic
has
certainly
highlighted
digital
poverty,
particularly
in
in
wards
like
inner
city
awards
like
mine,
hair.
B
D
A
I
would
very
much
agree,
especially
when
we've
got
quite
the
population
densities
that
yourself
and
I
have
in
our
respective
wards.
So
it's
important
to
reflect
that
in
planning
policy.
That's
excellent!
That's
the
last
speaker!
I
have
on
this
item
folks,
so
just
to
just
to
wrap
up
sorry,
we
might
do
some
slight
wee
bit
of
computer
work
here.
H
So
thank
you
chair,
so
that
that
that's
very
helpful
in
terms
of
the
the
the
the
right
policy
areas
to
be
considering.
So
what
what
panel
can
expect
on
the
2nd
of
march
is
the
material
that
we
intend
to
put
out
for
consultation.
H
So
picking
up
on
some
of
the
points
raised
at
this
meeting
and
the
previous
meeting,
this
will
be
resident
and
local
person
and
investor
and
developer
focused
to
elicit
a
response
about
the
direction
of
travel
for
these
policy
areas
and
help.
Then
in
turn
create
draft
policies
in
due
course.
So
I
I
hope
that
members
will
hold
in
their
heads
this
discussion
and
the
one
we
had
last
november
and
when
we
bring
the
jigsaw
puzzle
together
on
the
second
of
march,
brilliant.
A
Well,
thanks
for
that,
it's
really
helpful
mine
on
that.
Now.
I'm
gonna
close
off
that
item
then,
and
let's
progress
on
to.
A
K
So
this
is
a
government
consultation.
It's
the
latest
government
consultation
which
the
deadline
for
it
is
on
the
28th
of
january,
the
it
relates
to
three
main
segments,
three
main
sections
and
all
relate
to
permitted
development
rights.
There
are
a
series
of
questions
relating
to
each
of
three
sections
and
they
are
the
pendant
they
are
attached
to
appendix
one.
K
So
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
go
through
each
section?
I
don't
know
whether
you
want
to
stop
at
the
end
of
each
section
for
questions
or
whether
you
would
like
to
just
wrap
it
all
up
at
the
end.
In
terms
of
I
mean,
the
general
thrust
of
the
consultation
is
about
two
things.
One
is
about
changes
to
in
relation
to
the
high
street
and
responding
to
those
and
extending
committed
development
rights
around
those.
K
The
other
one
is
to
do
with
kovi
19
and
making
sure
that
there
is
adequate
public
infrastructure
in
responding
to
exam,
for
example,
the
need
for
hospitals
and
schools.
K
So
if
I
run,
if
I
go
straight
to
the
first
area,
so
this
relates
in
particular
to
the
new
use
class
e,
which
was
introduced
on
the
first
of
september.
K
I
think
you'll
all
be
familiar
with
the
the
use
class
ce
introduces,
a
range
of
uses
which
are
commonly
found
on
the
high
street,
such
as
retail
restaurant
office,
financial,
professional
services,
indoor
sports,
medical
and
nursery.
What
the
consultation
in
particular
is
wanting
to
do
is
to
expand
this
right
to
expand.
K
The
change
of
use
to
allow
use,
as
well
in
particular,
is
looking
at
two
permitted
development
rights
both
of
those
exist
both
of
those
do
exist.
Currently,
however,
the
scope
of
them
will
change
for
so,
for
example,
firstly,
from
office
to
residential,
which
is
class,
all
of
the
permit
general
committed
development
order.
K
The
there
is
already
a
committed
development
right
from
retail
to
residential
sorry
from
office
to
residential,
but
it
doesn't,
it
doesn't
have
a
size
restriction,
nor
is
it
applicable
to
listed
buildings.
The
second
permitted
development
right
is
relation
is,
is
in
relation
to
retail
and
residential
results,
plus
m
of
the
general
permitted
development
order.
Currently,
there's
a
size
restriction
on
those
of
150
square
meters,
the
difference
between
the
existing
permitted
development
rights
and
what
this
government
consultation
paper
is
currently
proposing
is
that
these
new
restrictions
would
go
beyond.
K
For
example,
restaurants,
indoor
sports
crashers
would
now
be
able
to
convert
to
residential,
and
there
would
be
no
size
restrictions.
The
cap
of
150
square
meters
currently
for
retail
would
be
gone,
so
there
wouldn't
be
a
size
limit
on
in
on
there
in
terms
of
prior
the
prior
approval
process,
a
number
of
questions
are
set
up.
A
number
of
prior
approval
criteria
set
out
such
as
flooding,
transport,
contamination,
impact
on
noise,
provision
of
adequate
natural
light,
etc.
K
So,
but
one
positive
to
come
out
of
it
is
out
of
the
consultation,
is
that
the
nationally
described
space
standards
would
still
be
applicable.
So
in
terms
of
our
general
response,
is
it
the
concern
really
is
about
section,
106
and
affordable
housing
requirements?
The
prior
approval
process
would
not
pick
those
up,
whereas
a
full
planning
application
clearly
would
pick
those
up.
So,
in
terms
of
figures,
I've
also
looked
at
what
impact
the
current
permitted
development
rights
have
in
terms
of
loss
of
retail.
K
Today,
the
uptake
of
this
permitted
development
right
has
been
fairly
low
since
the
introduction
of
it
in
2013,
we've
only
had
22
schemes
with
a
total
of
40
residential
units.
Clearly,
the
cap
of
150
square
meters
has
a
bit
has
had
an
impact.
The
the
one,
the
the
right,
which
is
likely
to
have
a
bigger
impact,
is
a
loss
of
office
to
residential,
which
shows
a
more
significant
use.
So
since
2030
2013
we've
had
97
applications
with
a
total
of
three
thousand
and
eight
three
thousand
eight
hundred
and
seventy
seven
units.
K
So
looking
ahead,
the
trend
could
be
that
would
increase
working
from
home.
That
committed
development
right
could
have
a
more
significant
impact
on
housing
supply.
The
planning
white
paper
is
which
is
clearly
linked
with
this
in
set
out,
the
sill
would
be
picked
up,
potentially,
as
through
limited
development
planning
up
the
application.
Approval
processes
would
pick
up
sale.
However,
the
same
isn't
said
about
section
106
and
affordable
housing.
A
Well,
actually,
thank
thanks
for
pausing.
Let's
do
members
got
any
questions
or
comments
at
this
point.
Let's,
let's
dive
into
sections
nazarene
just
make
it
easier.
I've
been
doing
zoom
all
day,
so
accommodate
my
brain,
just
just
just
just
as
a
couple
of
overarching
points
from
myself,
just
as
long
as
the
a
consultation
response,
no
matter
what
the
question
reflects.
A
The
fact
that
there
are
there
are
real
dangers
and
concerns
with
development
right
we're
allowing
other
uses
to
go
to
residential
in
terms
of
quality
design,
quality
space
living
standards,
whether
the
eligible
for
affordable
housing,
whether
it's
vulnerable
for
sale,
whether
to
put
to
get
to
brass
tax,
whether
they
they
they're
fee
chargeable,
for
the
planning
service
to
be
able
to
process
these
things.
A
That
kind
of
thing
all
that
we
want
reflecting
as
strongly
as
possible
throughout
the
consultation
response,
I
think,
elected
colleagues
and
officer
colleagues,
will
be
very
very
aware
of
some
of
the
problems
that
this
has
caused
in
london
in
other
parts
of
the
uk.
A
It's
when
these
pd
rights
were
first
opened
up
for
office
to
residential.
There
are
some
frankly
horrendous
developments
that
they're
the
council
colleague
in
london
reflected
this
will
just
create
the
slums
of
the
future,
and
that
was
a
few
years
ago
when
they
introduced
well.
Those
slums
are
now
the
slums
of
the
future.
C
Just
very
briefly
one
is:
I
found
it
difficult
to
actually
look
at
this,
because
I've
not
got
a
copy
of
the
actual
consultation
document
with
us
here.
I've
been
trying
to
get
a
hold
of
it,
but
because
of
printing
restrictions,
I've
not
been
able
to
get
one,
because
I
want
to
use
my
own
printer
at
home.
So
it's
been
very
difficult,
but
that
said
the
points
I
would
make
in
respect
of
any
other
in
question
3.2
on
the
papers
here
on
page
49..
C
I
do
think
we
need
to
emphasize
clearly
the
need
for
usable
green
space
coming
from
this.
So
I
think
we
need
to
find
a
way
of
wording
it
more
strongly.
That's
not
I'm
not
criticizing
what
you've
said.
I'm
just
making
the
comment.
I
think
we
need
to
make
it
more
clear
that
we
want
usable
green
space
to
come
from
this.
Otherwise
we
will
find
people
marooned,
as
happened
in
the
first
lockdown,
that
people
were
finding
it
very
difficult
to
be
able
to
access
green
space.
C
Secondly,
I
think
we
need
to
make
what
concerns
me
is
the
timings
of
this,
because
in
the
short
term,
I
would
think
that
we
will
have
a
lot
of
empty
buildings
and
leads
depending
how
long
it
takes
us
to
get
out
of
covert
and
to
get
the
economy
up
and
running
again,
and
some
people
might
want
to
bring
forward
some
of
these
buildings
for
use
as
housing
so
that
they
can
get
a
return
on
their
money,
but
it.
C
But
in
actual
fact
the
best
thing
for
the
city
as
a
whole
would
be
to
keep
it
as
potential
retail.
But
once
it's
gone,
it's
gone
and
it's
how
quickly
we
can
manage
that
particular
issue,
because
that
could
be
one
of
the
and
then
the
final
point
is:
is
there
any
mention
in
the
document
about
the
size
of
the
dwellings
that
are
going
to
go
in
it?
In
other
words,
are
the
government
going
to
allow
it's
usually
something
that
counselor
campbell
picks
up?
C
Are
they
going
to
try
and
squeeze
in
a
whole
lot
of
small
units
so
that
you
can
get
you
know
100
units
built,
whereas
if
you
were
doing
them
on
standard
sizes,
it
would
actually
only
be
60,
for
example,
just
to
pick
two
figures
out
there.
You
know
so
is
there
anything
because
I've
not
got
the
document,
but
those
will
be
my
initial
concerns
and
comments.
K
Yeah,
would
you
shall
I
respond
to
those
please
I'm
happy
to
send
a
full
copy
of
the
consultation.
Now
it
is
quite
lengthy,
but
I
think
it
does
help
in
terms
of
understanding
the
context
and
the
questions
in
terms
of
the
issue
which
counselor
anderson
has
raised
about
usable
greens
green
space.
K
I
totally
agree
it's
the
fallout
from
not
considered
not
considering
full
section
106
ask
which
we
would
do
through
a
planning
application
which
the
prior
approval
process,
I
think,
is
in
danger
of
losing
that
quality
and
consideration
of
issues
which
local
communities
would
also
bring
in.
K
So
I
will
strengthen
that
side
of
it
in
terms
of
the
point
council
and
this
anderson
makes
in
terms
of
empty
buildings
in
leeds
and
the
balance
of
having
an
empty
or
vacant
unit
units
on
the
high
street
versus
units
which
are
active,
but
not
necessarily
of
retail
in
the
high
street.
I
think,
as
a
local
planning
authority,
we
try
to
protect
our
high
streets,
but
we
have
to
recognize
that
there
is
a
changing
landscape
there.
K
But
in
the
consultation
we
do
try
to
set
out
a
stance
which
protects
retail
units
where
we
can,
in
terms
of
the
size
of
dwellings.
As
I
say,
the
the
consultation
does
set
out
that
the
nationally
described
space
standard
is
applicable.
So
hopefully
that
will
assist,
but
clearly
the
prior
approval
process
only
considers
the
issues
the
criteria
set
out.
K
I
think,
if,
if,
if
the
proposal
to
come
out
of
this
consultation
is
that
the
prior
prior
pro
a
prior
approval
process
is
continued
with,
I
think
we
should
set
out
a
wider
range
of
criteria
to
be
considered
as
part
of
that
to
get
that
qualitative
angle
back
in.
A
This
could
very
much
compromise
our
placemaking
ability
and
take
a
very
much
take
on
board
council
anderson's
point
about
time
and
time
skills
where
this
too
short
term
is,
but
I
also
think
I'd
say
it's
compromising
so
that
our
approach
to
20,
minute
neighborhoods
and
that
that
kind
of
thing
and
it
just
needs
reflecting
as
strongly
as
possible.
I
don't
want
to
give
the
impression
I'm
not
in
favor
of
these
pd
rights,
but
you
know
I'm
not
really
in
favor
of
these
pd
rights,
okay,
councillor
campbell.
E
Thank
you,
sir.
Very
new.
Most
of
the
issues
I
was
concerned
about,
I
think
I
do
have
some
concerns
about
the
viability
of
local
centers.
If
there
is
pressure
to
take
out
particularly
shop
units
and
for
barry's
information,
it's
actually
already
happening
in
auckland.
We
just
had
two
applications.
Fortunately
turned
down
to
take
out
a
couple
of
retail
units
on
the
primary
shopping
frontage
turn
them
into
residential.
E
I
think
we
need
to
flag
up.
Perhaps
our
concerns
about
the
effect
on
the
viability
of
smaller
centers,
because
you
know
leeds
does
have
a
number
of
smaller
town
centres
and
perhaps
make
some
reference
to
primary
shopping
frontages,
where
we
would
discourage
the
use,
particularly
on
the
ground
floor
of
residential,
as
opposed
to
shopping
right.
Thank
you.
Chet.
A
Excellent
and
concise
I
like
councillor
campbell
yeah,
I
agree
completely.
A
There
could
easily
be
a
rush
to
a
rush
to
go
resi
with
all
of
this,
and
it
could
really
compromise
well,
as
before
mentioned
place,
making
be
right,
just
viability
of
local
centers
at
a
time
when
all
of
that
is
rather
in
flux
at
the
moment,
due
to
not
only
the
pandemic
but
the
the
huge
shift
to
online
and
how
that's
impacting
on
things
and
and
yes
was
there.
Somebody
used
the
phrase
earlier
when
it's
gone,
it's
gone
well,
yeah.
B
Thanks
I've
only
just
put
it
up,
I
think
others
might
have
put
it
up
before
me
unless
they're
you're
absolutely
next.
So
it
was
just
a
question,
and
forgive
me
if
I
haven't
read,
you
know,
read
the
meaning
into
the
paper
on
on
the
first
proposal,
then
the
change
of
use
with
this
new
class
e.
Presumably
this
refers
only
to
the
change
of
use,
not
not
the
building.
So
if
there
was
any
change
needed
to
happen
to
the
building,
that
would
not
be
allowed
without
permitted
development.
Is
that
correct
nursery
yeah,
the
changing.
K
B
Okay,
so
if,
if
there
was
a
proposal
to
change
either
some
industrial
use,
building
into
housing
or
homes
of
some
kind
and
ordinarily,
we
wouldn't
consider
the
frontage
of
the
building
or
the
construction
or
the
design
of
the
building
appropriate
or
suitable
for
housing?
Is
there
anything
the
planning
authority
could
do
about
that.
K
Yeah
I
mean
the
the
issue
here
is
because
the
use
classes
order
allows
the
flexibility
between
those
users,
so
it
doesn't
constitute
development.
What
we
it
strips
down
the
powers
of
the
local
planning
authority
to
only
be
able
to
focus
on
certain
issues
such
as
shock
frontages,
I
mean
it
may
be
jonathan.
Do
you
want
to
add
anything
in
terms
of
the
dm
issues
on
that.
G
Yes,
I
think
the
issue
is
that
we
tend
to
get
the
applications
in
for
the
change
of
views,
first
of
all,
without
necessarily
including
all
the
physical
alterations
which
tend
to
follow
on
and
once
the
principle
is
established,
then
there's
very
little.
We
can
do
in
terms
of
controlling
the
external
changes
to
try
and
prevent
the
use
in
principle.
G
Well
that
has
happened.
Unfortunately,
in
the
past,
I
think,
as
councillor
walsh
are
alluded
to
in
certain
parts
of
the
country
we
found
extremely
from
our
perspective,
on
suitable
buildings
being
converted
into
residential
use.
I
think
the
intention
of
this
paper
is
or
the
government's
intentions
to
try
and
address
some
of
those
issues,
but
I
think
the
problem
is
that
there
are
still
many
outstanding
issues
that
go
unresolved.
B
A
It
is
quite
literally
an
absolute
disgrace:
caroline
you're,
absolutely
right.
The
government's
approach
doesn't
reflect
the
issues
that
the
seriousness
of
the
issues.
I
would
anticipate
if
we
looked
at
colleagues
other
colleagues
responses
from
around
the
country,
particularly
london
boroughs
of
all
political
views,
I
think,
will
probably
have
very
much
similar
things
to
what
ours
have
in.
This
is
not
a
popular
policy
direction
amongst
local
government
from
from
central
government.
I
think
the
only
only
people
this
is
in
popular
popular
with
our
certain
types
of
property
developers
and
commercial
landlords
gosh.
A
K
Anything
I
have
just
got
on
that
same
paper,
two
more
sections,
one
is
only
very,
very
small.
Sorry.
A
K
So
the
second
section
and
again
this
is
this-
this
is
the
most
substantive
bit
really
is
about
the
provision
of
supporting
public
service
infrastructure.
K
What
the
consultation
is
looking
at
is
planning
reforms
to
speed
up
the
delivery
of
schools,
colleges,
hospitals
and
other
nhs
buildings
there's
two
strands
to
it:
one
is
about
existing
sites
and
existing
permitted
development
rights,
and
the
second
strand
is
about
new
sites
and
faster
decision
making
around
that.
So
I
mean
I
won't
go
into
all
the
existing
permitted
development
rights,
but
there
are
four
schools:
some
permitted
development
rights
which
just
which
total
up
to
100
square
meters
or
25
of
the
footprint
of
the
building.
K
What
this
proposal
is
doing
is
taking
that
to
the
next
level,
proposing
up
to
255,
250
square
meters
or
25,
a
slight
increase
in
height
as
well
to
benefit
from
the
right.
The
site
should
have
sufficient
land
to
build
the
extension
and
also
school
playing
fields
should
remain
protected.
So
that's
a
positive
prisons
for
the
first
time
will
enjoy
the
same,
committed
development
rights
as
schools
and
other
public
infrastructure
in
terms
of
that's
about
existing.
That's
about
widening
permitted
development
rights
in
terms
of
new
public
infrastructure.
K
A
faster
planning
application
process
is
proposed,
which
is
what
the
government
are
saying
is
that
local
planning
authorities
can
sometimes
take
up
to
16
weeks
to
determine
these
large
items
of
public
infrastructure
and
that
isn't
acceptable
and
that
that
should
now
they're
proposing
that
that
goes
down
to
10
weeks.
So
these
infrastructure
projects
will
be
taken
out
the
scope
of
major
development,
a
new
scope
will
be
identified,
which
is
looking
at
fast
tracking.
That
speeding
decision
making.
K
Another
proposal
is
also
that
the
21
period
21
day
statutory
public
consultation
period
will
be
reduced
down
to
14
days.
Also
discharge.
Your
planning
conditions
will
again
be
fast
track
that
these
planning
applications
need
to
be
prioritized
over
other
planning
applications
so
that
they're
delivered
the
there's.
Also
a
proposal
that
the
secretary
of
state
be
identified
by
the
local
planning
authority
at
the
outset
as
to
when
the
local
planning
authority
feel
that
these
planning
applications
can
be
determined.
K
So
in
terms
of
our
the
wide
the
responsive
are.
There
are
a
number
of
issues
I
mean.
Often
these
side
school
sites
are
quite
tight
sites
within
tight
urban
grain.
You
know
surrounded
by
residential
areas,
an
increase
say
up
to
25
for
a
school
whilst
it
could
be,
the
impact
on
amenity
could
be
quite
significant.
K
For
example,
an
extension
could
really
could
introduce
a
need
for
a
car
park.
If
that
hasn't
been
planned
in
through
a
prior
approval
process,
then
the
car
parking
then
spills
out
into
the
surrounding
area.
The
the
proposal
to
reduce
down
the
consultation
came
down
to
14
days.
I
think
we
don't
support.
I
don't
think
that
gives
the
community
adequate
time
to
consult
on
what
could
be
quite
significant
issues
in
terms
of
immunity.
A
Thanks
nazarene
yeah
to
support
your
approach.
You
you've
taken
and
campbell's
indicated.
He
wants
to
speak.
E
Yeah,
thank
you
chair.
It's
it's
an
afternoon
for
nostalgia
because
when
well
I'm
going
back
to
when
I
first
became
a
member
of
leeds
city
council
in
those
days,
you
may
not
remember
it.
Mr.
E
No
he's
predecessor,
we
talked
the
hospitals
in
those
days
had
a
thing
called
crown
immunity
which
in
effect,
allowed
them
to
do
whatever
they
liked
and
for
those
councillors
who
represented
wards
with
hospitals,
particularly
saint
james
and
the
lgi.
It
caused
horrendous
problems
because
buildings
were
stuck
up.
Nobody
ever
produced
any
car
parking,
nobody
thought
about
access
and
all
this
sort
of
thing,
and
eventually
we
had
prisons
too
colin,
I
might
have
just
won
in
my
award.
Yeah
yeah.
E
True
sorry
forgot
about
that,
but
that
we
we
eventually
persuaded
government
all
local
authorities
that
actually
crown
immunity,
wasn't
a
good
idea,
because
there
was
no
effectively
no
plan
and
control,
and
I
worry
that
we
might
go
back
to
that.
I
really
I'm
not
a
hundred
percent
other
than
prisons,
which
are
always
unpopular
with
everybody.
E
I
I'm
not
sure
that
there
really
is
that
much
of
a
delay
on
on
dealing
with
these
applications
and-
and
you
know
to
say
it's
taking
16
weeks
to
do
it
well.
Some
of
these
applications
are
really
big
and
very
complex,
and
the
idea
that
we
should
just
forget
about
the
fine
detail
seems
to
me
a
little
strange,
and
I
think
mr
feeny
will
will
support
me
in
this.
E
Actually,
if
you
look
at
some
of
the
big
applications
that
take
a
long
time,
it's
actually
the
developer
who's
the
problem,
not
the
council.
I
would
agree
with
the
comment
in
relation
to
cutting
the
the
public
consultation.
I
mean
we,
we
get
complaints
now
that
21
days
is
not
long
enough.
E
C
E
Actually,
not
that
interesting
what
you
think
so,
that's
my
point
sure.
A
Yeah,
I
very
much
agree.
It
seems
unnecessary,
I'm
not
sure
where
these
public
sector
projects
have
been
delayed.
It's
probably
not
through
the
planning
system,
the
latest
health
and
education
projects.
Particular
education
might
be
to
do
with
a
complete
fragmentation
in
the
education
planning
system,
as
those
davis
who
went
through
the
sap
inquiry
will
have
had
aptly
demonstrated
to
us
on
numerous
occasions.
If
that
could
be
reflected
in
comments,
nazarene
that'd
be
really
really
helpful.
A
I
mean
that's
where
the
real
problem,
like
the
planning
system,
seems
to
be
used
as
a
bit
of
a
bit
of
a
sort
of
a
punch
bag
for
actually
other
systems.
Other
public
policy
problems,
if
you
like
systemic
problems-
and
I
think
that's
a
bit
reflected
in
here-
any
more
questions
that
section
then
we
can.
Oh
sorry,
miss
finney.
I
Just
a
couple
of
points
chair,
we
probably
should
say
that
not
not
all
de
developers
are
responsible
for
delays,
although
it
can
happen
on
some
on
some
occasions,
but
in
terms
of
your
point,
councilworld
show
that
you've
just
made.
I
think
that's
a
fair
comment.
That
often
planning
is
a
process
which
is
seeking
to
deliver
the
outcomes
of
other
related
public
bodies,
ambitions
in
terms
of
their
strategic
estate
or
delivery,
and
that's
both
coming
back
to
councilman
herron's
point
before
about
what
level
of
influence
are
we
dealing
with
here?
I
There's
an
issue
there
about
the
alignment
of
the
processes
and
approvals
that
are
necessary
through
those
departments
and
how
they
relate
to
policy
through
clg
and
I
think,
to
some
extent
the
position
is
made
more
complex
also
by
other
agencies.
People
such
as
health,
health
bodies
and
also
agencies
such
as
homes,
england,
each
of
those
running
to
particular
timetables
and
imperatives
in
terms
of
how
they're
operating
their
funding
or
their
approval
processes.
So
I
think,
there's
a
question
here
about
alignment
and
it
isn't
planning
necessarily
that's
part
of
the
problem.
I
A
K
K
That's
now
made
it
quite
complex
and
quite
complicated,
especially
when
the
general
permitted
development
order
is
still
referring
to
old
use
classes,
and
then
we've
got
a
new
use
class,
which
has
already
been
in
place
since
the
1st
of
september
what
their
oppos,
what
they're
proposing
is
a
consolidation
of
all
of
the
pd
rights
into
one
document,
which
makes
it
simpler
to
read
the
only
issue
that
we
that
is
you
may
want
to
comment
on
in
that
is
that
they,
the
consultation,
also
states
that,
whilst
rationalizing
these,
the
the
opportunity
may
take
be
taken
to
widen,
permitted
development
rights
further.
D
A
Yeah,
oh
very
old,
very
much
so
it's
that's
a
sort
of
a
number
flashing
light
and
no
mistake:
isn't
it
really
pbd
rights
do
not
require
any
further
widening.
Quite
the
opposite!
That's
a
really
strong
section.
Thanks
nazarene
members
got
any
comments
on
that
section.
A
A
Don't
none
of
you
dare
put
up
your
handy
scurvy
dogs,
right,
brilliant
awesome
in
that
case
folks.
Thank
you
very
much
for
efforts
this
afternoon
and
put
it
up
with
my
lame
dad
jokes,
particularly
the
one
at
the
end,
so
I'll
close
the
meeting
thanks
so
much
folks
stay
safe
now.
Thank
you,
joe
okay.
Thank
you.