►
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
A
A
C
Thank
you,
chair
michael
dougherty,
principal
planner,
case
officer,.
C
A
H
Thank
you,
chair
under
agenda
item
number
one.
There
are
no
appeals
against
the
refusal
of
inspection
of
documents
under
agenda
item
number
two
with
no
items
today
which
require
the
exclusion
of
the
press
and
public
under
item
number.
Three,
I'm
not
aware
of
any
late
items
of
business
under
a
gender
item.
Number
four
could
ask
members
if
they've
got
any
declarations
to
make
no
under
agenda
item
number
five:
we've
got
apologies
for
absence
for
councillor
anderson.
Now
we
do
have
councillors
chimel
nominated
as
a
substitute
today,
but
she's
not
arrived.
Doesn't
yet.
A
A
B
A
M
Thank
you
chair.
This
is
just
to
remind
members
of
a
procedural
point
in
relation
to
this
application,
so
some
members
may
recall
that
they've
considered
an
application
on
this
site
recently
in
pr
previously.
However,
that
was
subject
to
a
legal
challenge
and
the
council
consented
the
judgment,
so
that
decision
was
actually
quashed.
M
So
in
relation
to
that
previous
determination
of
the
application
that
should
not
be
treated
as
any
relevant
material
planning
consideration
in
favor
of
granting
the
permission
today
today,
you
must
consider
all
of
the
information
before
you,
and
only
what's
before
you
in
the
in
the
report,
in
any
background
documents,
and
also
listen
to
all
representations
that
you
hear
today,
but
no
regard
should
be
had
to
what
was
discussed
or
what
went
before.
Thank
you.
C
The
the
application
relates
to
an
outline
and
proposal
for
residential
development
at
old
field
lane
worklet
this
stage.
The
matters
considered
by
members
is
relates
to
the
principle
of
the
development
and
access
into
the
site
with
all
matters
reserved
for
a
future
application.
C
So
just
going
to
the
slide,
it's
an
overhead
image
just
to
show
the
site
context
the
application
site
located
in
the
bottom
center
of
that
slide,
there's
a
as
we
as
the
shopping
store
to
the
right-hand
side
of
the
application
site.
Residential
properties
are
located
to
the
south,
as
you
can
see,
there's
they're
also
located
to
the
west
and
the
east
of
the
site,
with
existing
green
space
located
to
the
north.
C
Just
to
give
you
an
idea,
this
is
a
wider
overhead
shot
of
the
application
site
and
it's
located
to
the
top
left
of
that
image
and
towards
the
right
is
whitley.
Recreation
ground,
which
is
the
closest
allocated
green
space
for
the
development,
is
approximately
a
three
minute
walk
from
the
site
to
the
entrance
at
old
field.
Lane.
C
This
photo
is
taken
from
old
field,
learn
itself
looking
at
the
site,
and
this
point
where
you
can
see
the
gap
in
the
wall
just
to
the
corner
of
the
site,
and
this
is
where
the
vehicle
access
is
proposed.
As
part
of
the
application.
C
C
C
And
this
photo
is
taken
from
oldfield
lane,
looking
left
towards
the
western
boundary,
you
can
see
a
building
there
and
which
is
within
the
cyber
vacant,
and
this
will
be
demolished
as
part
of
the
development
itself.
C
And
this
photo
is
taken
from
oldfield
avenue
to
the
west
of
the
site.
There
is
an
area
of
hard
standing
there,
which
was
associated
with
its
former
use
and
final
photo.
This
is
taken
from
oldfield
avenue,
it's
just
to
show
that
there's
a
slight
difference
in
levels
between
the
application
site
itself
and
old
field
avenue,
and
some
members
have
a
full
report
in
front
of
them,
which
I,
like
the
main
points
for
consideration
on
the
application.
C
The
application
itself
looks
at
the
principle
of
the
development
and
the
access
to
the
site
in
terms
of
principle.
The
site
itself
is
allocated
for
housing
and,
as
such
officers
consider
that
there
are
no
planning
reasons
not
to
support
the
principal
conditions
are
to
be
attached
to
any
approval
which
deals
with
matters
relating
to
accessible
homes,
space
standards,
housing
mix,
environmental
policies
and
matters
relating
to
the
specific
site
requirements
regarding
the
vehicle
access.
C
This
has
been
assessed
by
highways
officers
and
there
are
no
concerns
raised
the
internal
roads,
access
arrangements,
etc
will
be
dealt
with.
The
area
matters
application
and,
as
such,
there
are
no
highways
objections
to
the
application
sport.
England
have
objected
to
this
game
and
they
propose
to
the
proposal.
Sorry,
they
consider
that
the
scheme
would
lead
to
the
loss
of
playing
fields.
Sport,
england
have
been
notified
as
a
statutory
consultant
on
this
application,
given
that
the
fields
have
been
in
use
within
the
last
five
years.
C
However,
a
large
majority
of
these
relate
to
the
principle
of
the
development
which,
as
mentioned,
has
been
well
established
through
the
sap
and
is
now
allocated
for
housing.
Other
material
comments
raised
that
are
covered
within
the
report
for
members
to
consider
and
just
to
highlight.
We
have
received
some
recent
recent
objections
from
all
three
ward
members
which
relate
to
the
amount
of
green
space
within
the
ward
and
how
this
was
calculated
during
the
sap
issues
of
site
ownership,
school
places
and
capacity
of
the
neighboring
primary
schools.
C
The
need
for
highway
improvements
to
surrounding
roads
to
cope
with
the
additional
traffic
the
development
could
create
and
concerns
about
the
footpath
into
the
miles,
breeze
and
anti-social
behavior
associated
with
that
and
finally,
and
there
is
a
gas
pipe
running
through
the
site
which
ward
members
have
highlighted,
and
that
is
highlighted
through
the
actual
site
allocation.
So
any
development
would
have
to
be
in
conjunction
with
consultation
with
northern
gas
services
in
additional
representation
has
been
received
from
councillor
linworth.
C
The
data
officers
consider
that
this
date
has
never
been
taken
through
a
statutory
process
of
adoption
formally
by
the
council
or
passed
through
any
governance
planning
procedure
that
invests
it
with
the
authority
and
therefore
officers
consider
that
limited
weight
can
be
given
to
the
plane
pick
strategy
and
the
playing
pitch
strategy
is
currently
being
reviewed
by
the
authority.
C
So,
just
to
conclude
for
members,
the
site
is
allocated
for
housing.
There
are
no
objections
to
the
principle
of
the
development
and
the
proposed
vehicle
access
to
the
site
has
been
assessed,
with
no
objections
raised
from
highways.
Colleagues,
obviously,
subjects
to
conditions
the
application
is
recommended
for
approval
and
subject
to
the
referral
to
the
secretary
of
state.
A
O
O
Stand
up:
okay,
I'm
a
retired
early,
as
teacher
sure
start.
Okay,
I
represent
the
united
communities
in
work,
including
the
objections
to
the
last
application
right.
I've
made
this
because
I'm
a
nursery
teacher,
I'm
going
to
tell
you
a
story.
Does
this
move
up?
Oh,
can
you
hear
me
all
right.
O
I
have
forgotten
my
first
point.
I
might
remember
later
I'm
going
to
suggest
you
ask
me
questions
because
I
was
preparing
for
two
minutes,
so
I
want
to
just
bring
to
your
attention
that
there
is
a
live
court
case
ongoing
that
is
waiting
to
conduct
a
judicial
review
read
regarding
lots
of
the
matters
involved
in
this
application.
P
P
O
It
to
myself
then
thank
you,
sir.
We
cannot
ignore
sport,
england,
sport,
england,
have
been
very
clear
this
in
your
document.
It
says
that
there's
been
no
community
use.
I
have
brought
with
me
the
evidence,
some
of
the
evidence
that
it
has
been
in
community
use
since
1850
1850
to
2021
it's
protected
by
trusts.
O
O
O
You
have
a
green
support
paper
of
2017
as
part
of
your
sap.
Oh,
the
point
I
was
going
to
raise
is
you
can
change
the
sap
you
have
done
so
with
the
matthew,
murray,
school
playing
pitch
policy?
You
don't
have
one
sport.
England
has
pointed
this
out.
Your
green
space
background
paper
of
2017
looked
at
work
iraq
and
measured
it
in
acres
and
then
recorded
it
in
hectares.
O
A
hectare
is
2.5
acres.
Approximately
it's
a
council
error
tom
riordan
acknowledged
that
the
deficiency
of
outdoor
space
sports
space
in
wurtley
is
about
12
acres.
Also,
army
is
deficient.
Therefore,
worthy
recreation
ground
is
given
to
them
as
part
of
their
sports
allocation,
also
holbeck,
even
more
town
across
the
whole
of
lee's.
There
is
a
deficiency
in
outdoor
sports
provision,
and
this
is
in
a
global
health
pandemic.
O
What
we
have
done
in
our
community
is
a
miracle.
What
you
saw
this
morning
was
done
by
grandma
with
a
lawn
mower.
The
council
had
done
as
it
should
have
done
in
2006
and
taken
this
trusted
land
from
the
trustees
because
they
didn't
want
it
anymore.
They
should
have
taken
over
maintenance,
but
only
if
they
used
it
for
a
sports
provision
we
haven't
been
on
furlough
we've
been
staffing,
the
care
homes,
we've
been
working,
hard,
key
workers
or
unemployed
in
our
ward.
O
M
Thank
you,
chair,
just
just
to
clarify
the
position
with
regard
to
the
asset
of
community
value
and
the
judicial
review
point
that
that
our
speakers
referred
to
today.
That
is
that
is
a
fact.
There
is
a
judicial
review
currently
ongoing
in
relation
to
the
council's
decision,
not
to
not
to
grant
a
declaration
of
an
asset
of
community
value
in
relation
to
this
site.
However,
as
set
out
in
paragraph
37
of
your
report,
it
fully
covers
this
point.
M
So
just
to
summarize,
for
you,
what
that
means
is
the
judicial
review
has
been
is
to
be
considered
by
the
high
court
later
this
year,
but
on
the
basis
of
of
our
refusal
at
the
point,
we're
at
the
moment
of
that
of
that
application
officers
of
the
local
planned
authority,
don't
consider
the
site
to
be
an
asset
of
community
value,
because
that
is
a
position
the
council's
have
at
the
moment.
M
However,
even
if
it
had
been
granted
to
be
an
asset
of
community
value
or
if
the
high
court
decides
that
our
decision
was
flawed,
then
it
would
be
a
material
consideration.
M
Such
that
permission
is
justified,
even
if
the
site
was
to
be
treated
as
such.
So
at
the
moment
our
position
is
it
isn't,
but
we,
you
know
you
do
need
to
acknowledge
that
that
is
being
looked
at
by
the
high
court,
but
in
any
event,
officers
have
set
out
what
their
plan
and
view
is
on
that
not
being
registered
or
even
if
it
was
registered.
What
that
would
mean
in
planning
terms
thank.
J
O
There
is
12
acres
or
more
deficiency
of
outdoor
sports
provision.
According
to
your
documentation,
tom
browden
said
this
was
insignificant
because
we
had
beast
androids
and
a
post-hit
post
hit
post
hill
as
natural
green
space,
but
beast
and
roy's
clues
in
the
name.
Also,
you
can't
access
that
because
it's
got
subsidence.
O
I
can't
remember
the
second
part
of
your
question.
It
was
about
the
planning
pitch
policy
sport.
England
have
said
that
you
can't
define
this
as
being
surplus
surplus
to
requirements
unless
you
can
point
to
an
audit
of
outdoor
sports
provision
and
prove
it
so
they
haven't
proved
it
so
until
there
is
a
playing
pitch
policy,
it's
sort
of
how
it's
hanging
on
a
you
know.
I
I
can't
explain
it
properly
really,
because
because
I'm
panicking,
like
mud.
G
Councillor
collins,
thank
you.
I
have
a
couple
of
questions.
If
you
use
google
and
you
look
at
workley
recreation
ground,
it
does
appear
to
have
five
pictures
on
its
site.
Do
you
agree
with
the
way
I'm
interpreting
google
and
the
second
is
if
the
community
were
able
to
to
take
over
this
site
rather
than
it
be
developed
for
affordable
homes?
Would
you
require
the
whole
site
or
a
fraction
of
a
site
and
and
how
long
before
you
have
a
business
plan
and
a
business
model
for
that
site?.
O
We
have
a
business,
a
business
plan
and
a
business
model
already,
and
we
know
where
to
get
sources
of
funding
as
regards
about
erect
they'd
have
put
another
pitch
on
there.
There
are
five
all
together,
it's
not
a
football
pitch.
It's
a
ski
slope.
You
spend
more
time
chasing
a
football
in
a
gale
force
wind.
There
are
no
toilets,
no
changing
rooms,
no
parking,
and
it's
not
in
the
heart
of
our
community.
O
It's
actually
up
a
hill,
it
doesn't
feel
par
part
of
our
community
als
and
certainly
not
part
of
the
community
of
army
where
bartholomew's
is
above,
which
is
directly
part
of
the
area
around
our
proposed
multi-sports
facility.
There
is
an
area
at
the
back
of
iraq.
The
sloping
land
where
compact
sustainable
housing
could
be
built
south
facing
you
could
actually
dig
up.
O
Workly
wreck
pictures
put
in
a
ground
source
heat
pump
to
heat
those
homes,
and
you
could
rectify
the
terrible
drainage
problems
up
there,
because
most
of
the
last
two
years
games
have
been
cancelled
because
of
the
state
of
those
pitches,
as
have
most
of
the
pitches
in
lee's
over
the
last
two
years.
Only
tv
harrison
is
playable
in
wet
weather
because
it
was
mined
for
clay
before
1850.
G
Can
I
come
back
okay,
so
your
business
plan,
then
is,
is
that
a
group
of
you
have
actually
sat
down
and
thought
about
it
or
or
do
you
have
a
document
yet
do
you
have
a
and
a
formal
community
group
with
that's
constituted?
Where
are
you
actually
with
that,
though?
Please.
O
We
have
the
t
we
have
the
tv
act,
tv
harrison
action
group
chaired
by
michael
medicroft,
for
my
ultimate
of
the
city
of
elise.
We
have
a
business
plan
drawn
up
by
a
local
business
by
a
local
business
community
and
we
have
looked
at
sources
of
funding
this
morning.
We
have
heard
of
very
serious
offer
from
one
of
the
three
local
clubs
that
amateur
clubs
that
would
like
to
base
there,
and
it's
very
hopeful
that
we
can
actually
gain
sources
of
funding.
K
If
you
look
at
it,
there's
definitely
a
football
pitch
there,
but
the
other
half
of
the
site
is
somewhat
overgrown.
I
think,
is
the
best
way
to
describe
it
more
natural,
perhaps,
but
even
better,
would
you
would
you
wish
the
I
suppose,
the
the
the
unkempt
area
to
be
retained
in
the
same
way
as
perhaps
you
might
wish
for
the
football
pitch,
or
would
it
be
possible,
in
your
opinion,
to
separate
the
two
out
and
perhaps
our
development
on
the
the
area
that
currently
doesn't
appear
to
be
used
for
recreational
sport.
O
We've
looked
into
this
with,
I
think
it's
jeffrey
chatterton
of
he's
a
professor.
They
met
a
geography,
professor,
an
eco,
ecologist,
community
homes.
We
discussed
it
with
him
about
two
years
ago
and
we
then
at
the
time
we
were
mulling
around
plans
to
me.
I
would
like
to
retain
those
historic
netball
courts.
They
were
amazing.
We
don't
have
enough
netball
provision,
outdoor
provision
for
this
city
for
girls,
we've
always
focused
on
football,
which
tends
to
go
for
boys,
but
there's
a
real
market
for
young
women
for
girls,
retired
people
to
use
netball
courts.
O
O
Oh,
I
know
hold
on
looking
at
the
green
space
at
the
back
of
the
of
the
four
four
acres
was
actually
in
my
mind.
There
actually
could
be
compact
deco
homes
around
it
and
up
and
still
retaining
the
green
areas.
It
just
requires
a
little
imagination,
and
this
could
be
a
real
flagship
pilot
project
for
leeds
council
eco
homes
on
worldly
wreck
eco
homes
around
our
sports
provision.
It
could
bring
new
life
into
the
area
and
give
us
all
hope.
E
Hey
claire,
can
I
ask
there's
lots
of
amateur
sports
clubs
in
and
around
that
area,
and
I
know
some
of
them
have
been
looking
for
a
home
in
inverted
commerce
for
a
long
time.
So
can
I
ask
why
they've
not
been
approached
in
previous
years,
and
I
actually
know
one
of
them
was
about
15
16
years
ago.
So
if
the,
if
that
ground
is
so
well
used
and
so
valued,
why
want
the
amateur
clubs
in
that
vicinity
encouraged
to
come
and
play
there?
Then.
O
That's
an
excellent
question:
that's
really
the
heart
of
the
matter.
Clubs
did
approach
the
charity
and
the
charity
said
that
you
would
they
would
have
to
buy
it
and
the
price
would
be.
Can
you
hear
me
two
million,
so
amateur
clubs
didn't
have
that
sort
of
funding.
It
isn't
the
finest
hour
for
the
charity
really
it.
O
I
can
tell
you
who
they
are
if
you
like,
what
one
is
bramley
primary
buffaloes,
workly,
juniors,
armley,
christchurch
football
club
and
I
think
a
kirk
stall
junior
group
are
all
looking
for
somewhere
to
base
and
play
and
if
you
know
about
the
pitches
in
leeds
over
the
last
two
years,
it's
been
a
struggle
to
get
games,
especially
for
young
people
on
the
pitches
because
of
water
logging.
O
E
O
O
You
also
need
to
perhaps
consider
how
much
the
council
are
paying
for
this
paying
the
charity
for
this
land
at
this
moment
in
time,
and
is
this
a
good
use
of
public
funds,
bearing
in
mind
you've
had
to
pay
our
legal
costs
approaching
20
000
already
in
two
cases.
Q
Thank
you
chair.
My
name
is
lynne
brooke
and
I'm
a
senior
project
officer
for
the
council,
housing
growth
team.
Unfortunately,
laura
whitehead,
who
was
the
project
lead
for
this
scheme
in
the
council's
and
go
team
who
was
registered
to
speak
today
on
behalf
of
the
application,
cannot
be
with
us
today
due
to
a
family
emerge
that
they
happen
to
deal
with.
I
will
be
supporting
the
planning
application
for
the
site,
all
field
learned
in
family
and
world
reward.
Q
Today.
There
are
five
key
points
I
would
like
to
make
in
support
of
our
application.
The
first
point
I
would
like
to
speak
about
is
the
site
allocation.
This
site
is
a
how
has
a
housing
allocation
as
per
the
site
allocation
plan,
originally
identified
in
2013
and
confirmed
in
2019
following
extensive
consultation,
our
scheme
will
address
all
the
requirements
stipulated
within
that
allocation
plan.
These
requirements
include
providing
on-site
green
space,
improving
access
to
and
through
the
site,
and
making
an
off-site
contribution
to
enhance
the
green
space
and
sports
facilities
within
the
ward.
Q
My
second
point
today
is
housing
quality.
The
council
housing
growth
program
is
something
to
be
proud
of.
We
have
set
a
very
high
standard
within
terms
of
build
quality
amenities
and
creating
homes
and
places
that
people
can
thrive
in
the
new
homes
will
be
highly
energy
efficient
and
use
alternative
energy
sources
to
fossil
fuels,
which
support
our
climate
emergency
aspirations.
Q
The
homes
will
exceed
the
requirements
on
building
regulations
and
ensure
compliance
with
en1
and
en2
of
planning
policy.
This
will
result
in
homes
having
a
low
carbon
impact
in
the
long
term.
The
third
point
I
would
like
to
make
is
housing
need.
There
remains
an
acute
need
for
good
quality,
affordable
housing
across
the
city.
Q
My
fourth
point
today
is:
I
would
like
to
make
reference
to
the
consultation
we
have
ensured.
Pre-Planning
consultation
was
carried
out
which
included
direct
mail
to
over
800
households,
including
an
online
consultation
material.
This
enabled
local
people
to
comment
on
our
proposals.
We
recognize
that
new
schemes
can
create
concerns
and
objections
in
relation
to
the
impacts
of
this
development
have
been
raised,
but
we
are
confident
that
we
can
address
those
legitimate
planning
concerns
in
our
more
detailed
applications.
Q
My
final
point
today
is
improvements
to
green
space
and
access.
The
development
will
provide
properly
laid
out
and
maintained
green
space,
which
provides
links
to
and
through
the
site,
creating
a
more
cohesive
and
integrated
development.
In
addition,
a
community
some
will
be
generated
to
improve
other
existing
local
green
space
and
sports
facilities.
Nearby.
Q
There
are
a
number
of
established
sports
clubs
within
the
community,
including
workload
juniors
farley
falcons
west
leeds
rugby
club
and
worley
football
club.
There
are
four
football
pitches
and
one
rugby
pitch
already
available
and
in
use
at
workload.
Recreational
ground,
which
is
very
close
to
site,
commuted
sums
generated
by
this
development,
can
attract
further
match
funding
to
support
spots,
to
support
sports
facilities
and
activities
in
the
world.
Q
K
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
you
being
sort
of
thrown
in
the
deep
end
on
this
one,
but
I
hope
you'll
do
your
best
right.
A
couple
of
questions
number
one
relates
to
green
space.
K
I
I
initially
I
was
going
to
ask
you:
would
the
green
space
the
policy
green
space
be
provided
on
site,
but
what
you
appear
to
say
at
the
end
was
no,
it
wouldn't,
and
can
I
ask
why,
if
that's
the
case,
it
will
not
be
provided
on
site.
I've
got
a
second
point.
You
talked
about
effectively
building
houses
that
were,
I
think
your
phrase
was
low
carbon
impact.
Q
Thank
you
counselor
for
the
questions.
The
on-site
green
space
will
be
delivered
in
line
with
pulling
policy.
The
landscape
and
scope
of
the
enhancements
will
deliver
on-site
and
include
in
in
the
reserve
of
mars
application.
The
green
space
provided
onsite
will
introduce
new
enhanced
existing
networks
on
site
to
encourage
peace
within
integrated
development.
It's
part
of
the
sap
allocation
to
provide
enough
off
suit
community
students.
K
K
B
C
K
Can
we
just
bottom
this
because
it's
important
are
you
saying
to
us
that
at
I
suppose,
detailed
application
time
if
we
agree
the
principle,
a
detailed
application,
there
would
be
a
conditioning
which
said
all
the
greens,
all
the
policy
green
space
had
to
be
provided
on
site.
P
Sorry,
just
just
just
just
to
clarify
this,
I
think
these
questions
actually
liam
want
to
finish
first
and
then
we'll
pick
it
up
afterwards,
rather
than
bringing
the
officers
in
part
way
through,
because
I'd
like
to
just
keep
this
clean
in
terms
of
how
we
deal
with
it.
So
I
do
apologize
for
that
slight
interjection,
so
we
perhaps
ought
to
come
back
to
this,
but
on
this
particular
issue,
no,
they
will
not
replicate
everything.
That's
currently
on
site.
P
On
the
the
new
site,
there
will
be
some
green
space
provision
provided
on
site,
but
it
will
not
be
the
football
pictures
as
such
and
though
there
will
be
a
provision
for
monies
to
be
used
off-site
to
actually
enhance
pictures
elsewhere
within
the
immediate
area.
A
G
E
Q
Thank
you
for
the
question
councillor,
so
the
proposal
would
look
to
develop
the
green
space
on
site
in
line
with
planning
policy.
However,
there
is
a
sap
requirement
to
provide
offsite
contributions
to
enhance
the
sports
facilities,
which
would
be
detailed
in
the
reserve
matters.
Application.
Q
Sorry
chet
did
the
council
like
a
further
contribution
towards
a
zero
carbon
impact
question?
Oh
so
we
deferred
that
so
in
terms
of
low
impact
on
turnip,
energy
sources
are
being
explored
currently
such
as
ground
source
and
air
source
heat
pumps
to
reduce
the
overall
impacts
of
the
homes
and
environment.
In
addition
to
the
homes
there
will
be
firmly
efficient,
reducing
the
overall
carbon
footprint
of
the
homes
and
the
bills
to
the
actual
resident.
P
Sorry,
just
just
to
add
the
comment
that
I
made
before
in
terms
of
clarification
on
councillor
campbell's
point:
the
application
does
actually
satisfy
the
local
plant
policy
g4,
which
is
afforded
significant
weight
in
regards
to
the
the
provision
on
site
and
the
the
sum
off
site,
and
it
further
complies
now
with
npp
pf,
paragraph
99,
which
again
is
another
material
consideration
that
should
be
given
to
by
members.
Thank
you.
A
G
The
first
question:
could
you
just
clarify
what
you
said
in
your
introduction,
because
you
said
there
were
affordable
homes,
but
then,
then
you
switched
to
council
houses.
First
of
all,
could
you
just
clarify
what
the
outline
planning
permission
would
be
for?
G
Yes,
because
I
think
the
document
said
affordable
and
then
the
second
thing
is:
have
us
officers
looked
at
the
sports
provision,
especially
the
pitches
on
workly
wreck,
and
if
they
are
of
poor
standard,
because
they
don't
get
boggy
or
are
on
a
slope
it
has
anybody,
looked
at
how
much
that
would
actually
cost
to
bring
those
up
to
a
better
standard
so
that
they
could
be
used
all
year
round.
G
A
lot
more
because
I
am
keen
to
know
whether
the
monies
coming
from
this
new
proposed
development
would
cover
that
cost,
because
I
think
that
would
be
part
of
the
mitigation
if
we
could
get
those
the
the
pitches
on
the
wreck
up
to
a
better
standard.
I
think
that
would
benefit
local
people.
C
Yeah,
certainly,
council,
I'm
sorry
yeah,
it's
a
fund,
100,
affordable
housing,
basically
is
what
the
development
is
proposing,
so
they're
all
affordable
units
that
are
going
to
be
placed
on
that
site
in
terms
of
the
sports
provision
and
the
worldly
wreck.
C
I
think
the
idea
like
I
said
this
is
obviously
outline
and
we
can
condition
through
reserve
matters
to
it,
tighten
it
all
up
and
ensure
what
members
are
minded
to
to
promote.
C
But
I
think
that
is
the
strategy
that
any
off-site
provision
goes
towards
working
records
for
improvements
to
those
sites,
but
I
don't
know
what
the
specific
cost
would
be
to
bring
whirly
rec
up
to
sort
of
a
a
five-star
standard
say
something
like
that,
but
the
funds,
I
think
that
well,
the
funds
would
be
sent
towards
worklet
to
improve
that
as
part
of
this
scheme.
I
I
So
can
an
officer,
please
take
me
through
the
process
and
the
challenges
that
have
been
had
to
the
sap
allocation
of
the
site,
because
in
that
sense,
that
is
the
material
consideration
for
us
here.
Is
it
actually
is
that
process
strong
enough
to
justify
the
it
being
allocated
as
a
piece
of
housing
development
land?
Everything
else
is:
are
all
civil
matters,
land,
ownership,
etc.
All
for
outside
of
this
room
that
to
me
to
the
crux
of
the
mata,
is
the
sap
solid
on
this.
M
Thank
you
chair.
I
can
help
out
with
that,
if
that's
useful,
so
yes,
members
will
be
aware
that
the
sap
was
adopted
after
an
extensive
couple
of
year
lead-in
period
and
it
was
adopted
after
a
three-week
public
examination
in
july
2019
and
as
part
of
that
the
sap
looked
to
allocate
sites
that
were
considered
by
the
council
and
then
the
inspector
as
being
sound
and
appropriate
to
deliver
housing.
M
This
was
one
such
site
and
as
part
of
finding
out
whether
that
sound
as
being
an
allocation
matters
such
as
all
of
these
things
and
existing
use
are,
are
considered,
and
at
that
time
it
was
considered
to
be
an
appropriate
and
sustainable
site
for
housing
in
the
relevant
housing
market
characteristic
area.
M
Now,
if
mitigation
is
considered
necessary
before
allocating
the
site,
then
site
requirements
are
imposed
in
relation
to
that,
so,
in
other
words,
this
can
be
a
housing
site.
Subject
to
these
things
being
considered
and
as
you've
heard
today
from
offices,
there
were
some
site
requirements
that
were
required
and
they
set
out
in
your
report.
M
So
the
recognize
the
the
inspector
and
the
council
recognized
that
there
was
some
green
space
on
there
and
that
it
it
would
need
to
be
re-provided,
and
that
is
where
the
commutation
towards
that
reprovision
comes
in
now.
Members
will
also
be
aware
that
the
sap
was
subject
to
a
legal
challenge,
but
that
was
only
in
relation
to
the
green
with
the
former
green
belt
allocations.
This
site
does
not
fall
within
that.
I
am
within
that
challenge
and
therefore
remains
as
a
sound
adopted
site
within
the
sap.
M
That
is
the
council's
development
plan,
which
is
the
starting
point
for
members
to
consider.
Today.
You
have
to
consider
whether
the
great
way
that
you
should
attach
to
that
is
outweighed
by
anything
else,
and
other
things
that
are
set
out
in
your
report
need
to
be
considered
is
the
way
that's
to
be
attached
to
a
statutory
objection
which
is
from
sport,
england.
But,
as
we
explained,
and
I
set
out
in
paragraph
38
onwards,
the
officers
set
out
what
their
view
is
in
relation
to
that
sport.
England
objection.
M
I
Thank
you
for
that,
and
just
for
clarity
for
members
and
for
the
public
watching
as
part
of
that
process
will
be
the
inspector
of
taking
into
consideration
that
the
council
does
not
have
a
an
adopted,
a
green
spaces
policy
at
the
moment,
as
was
mentioned
that
we
have
something,
but
it's
not
actually
awaited
in
policy,
and
would
they
have
taken
into
consideration?
I
I
am
assuming
they
were
world
member
objections
at
the
time
were
they
taken
into
consideration
as
part
of
that.
M
Thanks
councillor
ray
just
just
to
give
an
idea
of
the
the
consultation
there
was
over
25
000
people
engaged
in
the
process
that
included
award
members
residents
across
the
whole
of
the
city
and-
and
they
were
all
they
were
all
had
regard
to
by
the
council
first
and
then.
And
then
the
inspector
in
relation
to
the
playing
pitch
strategy,
which
you
refer
to
the
the
evidence
base
for
the
sap,
was
actually
something
which
was
a
lot
more
detailed.
M
It
went
a
further
than
just
plain
pictures,
and
that
was
let
me
just
get
the
name
of
it,
because
it's
quite
long
it.
I
know
it
is
that
it
was
the
open
space,
sport
and
recreation
assessment
and
that
basically
looked
at
all
of
the
open
space,
green
space
sports
and
all
the
different
typologies
that
we
have
across
the
city,
and
it
made
an
assessment
of
that
and
that
was
used
to
support
the
evidence
to
allocate
green
space,
because
the
sap
also
allocates
green
space
or
designates
it
as
well
as
the
housing
allocation.
M
So
there
was
a
very
big
data.
Evidence
base
that
the
that
the
inspector
was
satisfied
with
and
had
regard
to
when
determining
whether
to
grant
application,
whether
to
grant
sites
to
allocations.
I
So,
just
for
clarity
that
would
have
been
taking
inspiration,
but
what
you're
actually
saying
is
they
would
have
gone
that
step
further,
it's
a
much
more
detailed
analysis,
so
actually
the
the
the
lack
of
green
space
has
been
proposed
by
the
the
objectives
in
the
area
would
have
been
taken
into
consideration
as
part
of
the
actual
process
of
green.
This
is
a
site
allocation,
housing.
P
Sorry,
obviously,
in
preparation,
you're
always
trying
to
second-guess
questions
on
things
of
this
nature.
Don't
you
just
like
to
add
it?
The
site
requirements
for
this
particular
site
that
we've
got
here
in
front
of
us
in
terms
of
the
on-site
provision
go
by
the
reserve
matters
that
will
be
forthcoming
at
a
later
date
and
the
off-site
sums
was
actually
went
further
than
than
in
many
other
sites
and
reflect
the
consideration
given
at
the
issue
at
the
time.
P
Just
going
back
to
the
absence
of
a
playing
pitch
strategy,
it
was
not
a
consideration.
The
site
was
assessed
as
part
of
the
leeds
open
space
and
recreation
strategy
that
nicole's
referred
to,
which
considers,
as
she
said,
over
a
thousand
over
a
thousand
of
green
spaces
across
leeds
in
its
entirety,
and
this
evidence
was
considered
by
to
be
robust
was
the
term
that
was
used
by
the
independent
inspector.
P
Having
debated
this
at
length
examination
by
by
the
participants,
it's
clear,
therefore,
this
was
a
strong
material
consideration
in
obviously
the
consideration
these
applications.
I
hope
that
fully
answers
the
question
with
what
nicole
said
as
well.
Thank
you.
K
Can
I
can
I
just
touch
on
this,
because
I
think
this
is
the
crux
of
the
discussion
that,
for
some
of
you
sat
through
all
the
meetings
of
the
sap
and
the
pre-sap
and
the
purse
sap
and
are
scarred
for
life
with
it.
K
I
think
one
of
the
things
we
always
said
as
part
of
the
allocation
was
yes,
these
sites
appear
to
be
available,
but
they
have
to
tick
all
the
other
boxes
as
well,
and
I
think
we'll
only
tick
all
the
other
boxes
at
this.
This
point
can
I
just
ask
a
question
because
it's
been
said:
hasn't
it
that
that
sport
england's
latest
comments.
K
K
Would
that
be
the
place
where
sport,
england,
for
example,
would
make
a
another
plea
bid
to
get
the
policy
overturned,
but
sorry
the
the
application
overturned
or,
if
we
do,
if
we
decide
to
set
aside
sport,
england's
objection,
is
that
it
meaning?
What
I'm
really
saying
is
just
starting
to
get
a
second
chance.
M
M
So
that's
the
reason,
so
we
notify
the
secretary
of
state
that
we
are,
if,
if
members
are
so
minded
to
to
grant
permission,
that
we
would
be
minded
to
grant
permission,
but
we
need
to
bring
to
their
attention
that
there
has
been
an
objection
by
by
a
statutory
council
t,
and
then
we
have
21
days
to
wait,
and
during
that
time
the
secretary
of
state
would
decide
whether
they
thought
it
was
appropriate
to
call
in
the
application
so
that
one
of
their
inspectors
could
consider
whether
to
whether
whether
to
agree
with
our
position
or
not.
M
J
Thanks
chair:
what's
the
legal
officer,
why
was
the
original
decision
quashed?
Why
are
we
back
here
again
at
that
particular
point:
I'd
like
some
clarity
on
that,
a
couple
to
the
planning
officer
para99
event:
the
mppf
talks
about
better
provision
in
terms
of
quantity
and
quality,
just
about
dealing
with
the
drainage
in
other
places.
It's
actually
saying
all
right,
we're
losing
a
pitch.
Here's,
the
new
pitch
so
where's,
the
new
pitch
going.
Can
somebody
confirm
that?
J
Can
the
plan
officer
confirm
that
the
playing
pitch
strategy
ain't
worth
the
paper
it's
written
on,
and
we
just
ignore
that
regards
to
the
fact
that
it's
council
policy,
apparently
and
in
terms
of
the
open
spaces
document,
the
long
title
document
that
the
chief
legal
officer
and
sorry
the
legal
officer
raised
at
this
particular
book-
did
that
confirm
the
12
acres
deficiency
in
terms
of
green
space
in
the
family
and
workly
ward.
C
Yeah
I'll
answer
the
questions
on
obviously
the
plain
picture
improvement.
There's
there's
not
necessarily
at
this
stage
details
to
confirm
that
a
plane
picture
will
be
put
back
or
a
new
plane
pitch
will
be
provided,
as
I've
alluded
to
earlier.
The
off-site
sums
generated
by
this
development
are
going
to
enhance
and
improve
other
pitches
within
the
locality,
which
is
one
of
the
requirements
of
the
of
the
sap.
C
Basically,
so
I
think
that
is
the
the
strategy
which
obviously
subject
to
reserve
matters
and
details
coming
back
to
members
later
notwithstanding
this,
which
is
for
outline
and
access
that
would
have
to
be
considered,
obviously
as
part
of
those
applications
and
if
that
makes
sense,.
P
Sorry,
there
were
other
issues
that
were
addressed.
The
pps
is
effectively
data
that
informs
policy.
So
it's
not
policy
and
that's
why
the
reference
was
made
to
its
lack
of
weight
in
the
decision
making
process.
It's
not
actually
policy
the
pps,
it's
a
basically
a
data
set.
Well,
it's
information
that
would
inform
a
strategy
so
yeah,
maybe
the
terminology
is
not
correct,
but
that,
but
that's
basically
where
it
is
and
in
terms
of
deficiency.
P
It's
an
interesting
question:
isn't
it
because,
as
nicole's
just
trying
to
trying
to
to
to
remind
me
that
this
this
was
actually
dealt
with
back
in
the
site
allocations
plan
stage?
So
it's
a
it's
a
decision?
That's
that's
being
made
that
things
have
been
reviewed
all
the
time,
because
obviously
sites
come
up
and
go
out
as
ever.
So
there
is
a
strategy
being
developed
by
parks
and
countryside,
but
at
this
point
in
time
we
think
it
is
acceptable
for
this.
For
this
pitch
to
be
lost.
L
Thank
you
chair.
I
think
you'll
be
quite
pleased
that
I'm
gonna
ask
a
highways
question.
L
The
area
is
very,
very
built
up,
shall
we
say
and
old
field
lane.
I
think
it
is
isn't
it
that
goldfield
lane
that
it's
on
from
memory
it's
a
few
years
since
I've
been
down
there,
but
I
used
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
down
there.
It's
very,
very
busy
it's
one
of
the
main
thoroughfares
in
and
out
of
the
city,
and
I
can
only
see
one
access
point
in
and
out
of
the
proposed
new
site.
L
So
I
just
wondered
what
what
was
yeah
the
thought
process
behind
that
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
around
the
ouster
site.
You've
got
a
pub
there,
so
you're
gonna
have
on
street
parking.
Although
we
don't
drink
and
drive,
people
don't
always
go
to
the
pub
to
drink,
so
they
do
sometimes
go
in
the
car.
L
So
I
just
wondered
if
those
things
have
been
taken
into
consideration,
please.
The
last
thing
we
want
is
to
create
a
bigger
highways
headache
than
the
neighbours
already
have
at
this
stage.
Thank
you.
D
Hello,
thank
you.
In
highways
terms,
this
is
a
a
relatively
small
site
and
for
sites
such
as
this
size,
you'd
only
generally
have
one
access
point
anyway,
because
we
tend
to
look
at
traffic
impacts
in
peak
periods
and
the
peak
period.
D
Traffic
flows
for
this
site
are
around
rounding
up
around
about
30
two-way
trips
in
each
of
the
peak
periods,
which
is
which
wouldn't
generate
any
sort
of
severe
impact,
because
in
in
highways
terms,
the
the
test
is
whether
whether
the
the
cumulative
impact
of
the
of
the
traffic
associated
with
the
development
would
create
a
severe
impact.
L
I
appreciate
all
of
that,
but
I'm
thinking
61
homes,
potentially
120
cars,
realistically,
most
cars,
most
most
homes,
have
sort
of
one
or
two
cars.
Now
you
know
as
much
as
we
want
to
get
away
from
the
car.
That's
the
fact
is
that
there's
you
know
and
where
are
all
those
traffic
movements
going
to
go.
D
Yeah
I
appreciate
that
that
people
are
more
than
one
car,
but
they
don't
all
drive
out
in
at
the
same
time.
So
in
this
case
we
are
in
every
case
really
with
a
with
a
a
residential
development.
We
use
the
trix
database
to
determine
trip
rates
for
foreign
development
and
we
apply
those
rates
then
to
developments,
and
in
this
case,
as
I
said,
the
the
peak
period
trip
rates
for
two-way
trips
are
around
30..
So
if
I
just
have
a
look
at
that
for
a
second
yeah,
that's
in
the
morning,
that's
that's.
D
Nine
vehicles
arriving
and
20
departing,
so
you've
got
20
cars
coming
out
in
during
the
morning
peak
over
that
hour
period.
Some
of
them
might
be.
You
know
they
won't
be
even
spread
over
the
hour,
but
obviously
they
they
won't
all
go
at
the
same
time
as
well.
So
it's
we're
talking
about
20
vehicles
leaving
there
in
the
morning
and
hitting
it's
in
the
morning
peak.
C
Yeah
just
to
further
probably
add
a
bit
to
that,
the
indicative
plan
which
the
applicants
have
submitted
it
does
ensure
potential
access
from
the
malls,
which
is
on
the
other
side
as
well.
So
the
main
entrance
exit
obviously
would
probably
be
off
goldfield
lane,
which
is
indicated
within
this,
but
there
is
provision
for
another
one,
possibly
depending
on
the
reserve
matters
and
obviously
on
the
no
of
the
61
number
within
the
sap.
C
Again,
that's
indicative,
and
I
would
imagine
that,
given
all
the
other
policy
requirements
of
the
site,
green
space
etc,
which
has
been
discussed
to
get
61
on
there
and
address
those
other
considerations
it
would,
it
would
likely
be
less
than
61
units.
I
would
imagine,
but
that
is
gain
caveat
subject
to
the
reserve
matters,
design,
layout,
etc.
E
The
plane
a
little
bit
today,
I
think
this
is
probably
one
for
yourself
or
maybe
nicole.
Yes,
sorry,
I
couldn't
remember
nicole.
I
know
we've
talked
about
the
land
being
agreed
under
the
sap
and
fully
appreciate
how
important
that
is.
But
can
I
ask
why
or
if
the
sap
packs
independently
for
many
of
the
strategies,
even
if
they're
only
advisory?
E
So,
for
instance,
I
refer
directly
to
the
playing
pitch
strategy
and
and
that's
part
of
the
objection
raised
by
sport,
england,
that
you
do
a
tally
up
of
what
playing
pitch
playing
pictures.
There
are
and
say:
well
we
haven't
a
surplus,
so
we've
got
a
huge
surplus,
so
we
can
get
rid
of
it
and-
and
I'm
just
really
asking
about
the
rationale
of
doing
it
before
that
strategy
has
been
completed
and
and
we
actually,
I
nearly
said-
we've
got
a
plan
level,
but
that's
a
bit
of
a
pun.
Isn't
it.
M
So,
just
in
a
planning
context,
the
sap
is
part
of
the
local
plan,
and
that
is
the
starting
position
for
members
to
give
that
has
the
greatest
weight
and
obviously,
as
you're
aware,
you
need
to
take
into
consideration
of
the
material
considerations
that
may
or
may
not,
in
your
view,
outweigh
the
weight
of
our
local
plan
as
a
starting
position.
So
you'd
start
off
thinking.
Well,
this
site
is
allocated
for
housing,
but
you
absolutely
right
to
listen
to
everything
else.
That's
been
put
before
you
now.
M
One
of
those
material
considerations
is
an
objection
from
a
statutory
council
team
which
you
do
need
to
to
to
give
way
to,
but,
and
so
is
the
so
is
the
nppf,
the
paragraph
99
that
we're
talking
about,
which
is
why
we
have
gone
through.
M
Our
officers
have
gone
through
that
in
great
detail
in
your
report
to
say
why
they
think,
having
had
a
look
at
paragraph
99
that
having
regard
to
that,
they
actually
are
of
the
view
that
it
falls
into
two
of
the
three
exceptions
it
permits,
which
would
then
lead
to
development
on,
on
a
on
an
open
space
being
being
being
clustered.
As
acceptable,
the
playing
pitch
strategy
is
something
it's
something
that
the
council's
obviously
gotten
have
been
working
on
and
it's
data
in
relation
to
playing
pictures.
M
But,
as
you've
heard
from
colleagues,
it's
not
been
through
any
sort
of
council
governance.
So
sometimes
we'll
have
strategies
that
will,
as
you
know,
go
through
executive
board
and
they
will
approve
that
as
being
a
council
strategy.
This,
as
we've
heard,
is
not
at
that
stage
yet
and
therefore,
whilst
it's
right
to
acknowledge
that
that
it
exists,
it's
not
a
formal
document
as
such,
and
it
certainly
as
we've
heard,
is
being
reviewed
because
it's
deemed
to
be
out
of
date
of
the
data
it
needs
updating.
M
So
so,
in
this
context,
it's
right
to
have
regard
to
it,
but
the
way
you
can
apply
to
that
I
would
suggest,
is
very
little
because
of
because
of
because
it
hasn't
been
approved
by
the
council
as
a
strategy.
Is
that
helpful.
E
Yeah,
but
what
I
was
actually
asking
well,
because
the
the
objection
refers
to
the
fact
that
it's
not
completed
doesn't
it,
so
it
would
perhaps
be
mindful
to
wait
until
it
was
completed.
So
you
could
use
that
information
to
inform
the
decision.
No,
it
does
spot
england's.
Objection
actually
says
that,
so
I
just
wondered
why
that
kind
of
hasn't
happened
or
why
we've
moved
it
before
that's
taken
place.
That
was
actually
my
question.
Sorry.
P
Council
berkey,
it
has,
in
effect,
to
be
fair
because
again,
you
know
we
expected
these
questions
and
I
suppose
I'm
going
to
hack
back
a
little
bit
to
council
finnegan's
question
because
nicole
answered
most
of
it
and
far
more
eloquently
than
I
did
paragraph
just
just
not
to
try
to
cloud
the
issue.
But
paragraph
40
of
the
report
goes
through
the
three
exceptions
in
some
detail.
So
I
think
that
answers
counselor
finnegan's
question
better
than
I
did
earlier.
P
If
you
have
just
a
quick,
quick
glance
at
it
and
nicole
referred
to
the
two
exceptions
in
particular,
but
the
playing
field
saturday
is
something
that
parks
and
countryside
previously
prepared.
P
But
then
a
green
space
audit
was
done
as
far
as
the
site
allocations
plan.
So,
in
effect,
the
site
allocation
plan,
which
is
the
adopted
document,
is
the
document
we
should
be
referring
to
as
a
form
in
the
policy
basis.
Is
that
correct,
nicole,
I'm
just
trying
to
get
in
order?
So
I'll
say
that
again
sorry,
so
I
just
said
that
it
turns
to
the
latter
question
from
councillor
burke.
The
playing
field
strategy
is
something
that
was
produced
by
parks
and
countryside
and
was
previously
prepared
by
them.
P
But
then,
as
part
of
the
sap,
we
did
a
green
space
audit,
which
took
into
account
all
these
thousands
of
areas
that
I
referred
to
previously.
That
forms
part
of
the
sop,
which,
of
course,
is
the
adopted
document.
That's
in
front
of
you
in
terms
of
the
council
policy,
and
this
is
why
I
refer
to
the
the
pps
actually
being
a
data
set
that
informed
further
further
further
decision
making
that
actually
ultimately
was
agreed.
As
part
of
this
happen,
as
I
went
through,
that
robust
process
of
consultation
etc,
that
that
okay.
M
And
also
at
the
local
plant
authority
have
an
obligation
to
assess
and
consider
and
determine
planning
applications
within
a
statutory
time
scale.
So,
while
sport
england
are
suggesting
that
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
defer,
we
have
a
statutory
obligation
to
to
be
determining
these
applications
within
the
relevant
time
and-
and
I
think
they
also
do
say-
you
know
that
sorry,
I'm
just
having
a
look
at
what
they
say
in
the
report.
M
Yeah
they're,
looking
to
replace
the
playing
field
well,
as
you've
heard,
there's
a
site
requirement
which
is
requiring
that
commuted
sum
not
necessarily
to
replace
it
but
to
enhance
or
improve
existing
sports
provision.
So
so
the
the
site
allocations
plan
through
that
process
it
already
identified
there
was
a
need.
It
wouldn't
just
want
to
lose
open
space
or
plain
pictures.
It
is
already
acknowledged
that
for
this
to
be
a
housing
allocation,
there
is
a
requirement
on
that
developer
to
make
a
provision
to
exist
and
enhance
existing
facilities.
G
G
P
Just
covering
those
two
points,
the
application
is
for
a
maximum
of
61.
Therefore,
the
condition
is
not
really
necessary
because
it
is
granting
permission
for
a
maximum
of
61.,
ultimately,
by
the
time
as
mike
referred
to
previously
with
the
other
requirements
that
will
be
required.
The
lee
city
council
shopping
list
wanted
a
better
description.
P
P
H
Okay,
I'm
not
sure
if
this
is
applicable
or
not,
but
so
I
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
the
the
passion
and
desire
of
the
the
residents
can
who
want
to
keep
their
sports
field
and
acknowledge
also
that,
probably
it's
not
a
very
level
playing
field
in
terms
of
the
council
versus
the
local
people.
But
my
question
in
a
way
is
about
the
the
leeds
school
sports
association,
which
is
the
75
ownership
of
this
land.
H
As
far
as
I
understand
so,
I
was
wondering
what
sort
of
discussions
have
been
with
the
sports
association.
It's
its
objectives
seem
to
be
from
1920
as
amended
to
promote
and
assist
the
form
of
athletic
activity
which
tends
to
improve
the
physique
and
morals
of
children,
attending
the
schools
of
the
city
and,
more
importantly,
to
endeavor
to
secure
better
facilities
for
playing
games
in
open
spaces
and
secure
adequate
equipment
for
games
in
all
schools
and
its
turnover
last.
I
think
the
last
two
years
was
around
50
000
pounds.
If
the.
H
If
the
council
is
going
to
buy
this
land
from
the
sports
association
and
that
might
increase
their
income
substantially
and
what
discussions
have
there
been
that
they
should
pursue
their
objectives
to
improve
the
facilities
of
sports
facilities
within
the
city.
P
Chair,
it's
a
good
question,
but
I'm
not
sure
it's
really
relevant
to
the
consideration
of
this
application,
because
the
lssa,
obviously
they've
got
their
own
rules
and
regulations
by
which
they
operate.
If,
if
then,
they
come
to
a
position
where
they
wish
to
to
develop
the
site?
Well,
that's
an
application
that
we
have
before
and
we
have
to
consider.
A
K
It
was
a
throwaway
line
about
a
possible
vehicle
access
to.
Is
it
mumsbury
place
prince
a
bit
small
having
been
on
site
today?
I
think
that's.
I
wouldn't
regard
that
as
a
very
good
access
point.
Given
the
narrowness
of
the
road
and
the
fact
it
was
parked
on
both
sides,
but
if
that's
so
shouldn't
the
red
line
be
different
on
here,
because
to
get
that
access
would
require
taking
land
which
currently
is
green
space,
which
presumably
belongs
to
the
city
council
this
bit.
That
sounds
like
a
question.
K
If
you,
if
you're
under
the
comments-
I
I
as
I
think
I've
said
already-
the
sap
was
a
long
drawn-out
process.
K
It
went
through
a
lot
of
registrations,
it
went
through
the
inspector
and
I
think
the
the
view
was
that
these
sites
were
available,
but
it
was
very
clear
from
day
one
that
these
sites
were
only
available
if
they
ticked
all
the
boxes,
and
I
think
with
hindsight
this
issue
of
the
playing
pitch
has
come
up
which
wasn't
taken
into
account
during
the
sap
discussion,
but
is
a
factor
which
I
think
we
need
to
take
into
account
because
sport,
england
have
raised
it
and
we're
back
on
this
issue
about
how
much
weight
do
I
give
to
sport
england's
comments
now
I
I
originally
looked
at
this
on
google
earth,
which
is
useful
at
times,
but
I
don't
think
anything
beats
a
site
visit
and
those
of
us
who
are
on
site
today
will
say
quite
categorically.
K
This
is
a
football
field.
Half
that
site
is
a
football
field.
It's
laid
out
as
a
football
field,
there's
some
flood
lights,
which
may
or
may
not
work,
but
there's
gold
pulse.
It's
marked
out,
and
it's
patently
played
on
so
to
the
layperson
and
to
sport,
england,
I
suppose
it's
a
playing
pitch
and
therefore
I
have
some
concerns
because
we
we
we
haven't
been
able
to
bottom
the
this
discussion
about
whether
there's
a
shortage
of
green
space
within
workley
or
not.
K
It
would
seem
from
my
casual
observance
of
workload
that,
like
everywhere
else
in
the
city,
quite
frankly,
there
isn't
enough
green
space,
certainly
enough
publicly
accessible
green
space.
I
don't
think
any
ward
has
that,
and
so
I
am
some
concern.
I
have
some
concerns
that
we
are
losing
what
appears
to
be
a
football
pitch.
That's
used.
K
I
appreciate
that
the
slightly
more
than
half
of
the
rest
of
the
site
is
in
a
wilder
state
and
probably
isn't
being
used
as
a
public
area
of
green
space,
though
I
think
it
was
a
reference
to
proper
green
space
and
I'm
not
100
certain.
What
proper
green
space
is.
So,
from
my
point
of
view,
I
I
I'm
really
having
problems
supporting
the
application.
I
know
that
there's
a
demand
for
housing.
K
I
understand
that,
and
particularly
there's
a
demand,
a
huge
demand
for
affordable
housing,
but
I'm
not
certain
that
simply
because
that's
a
good
point,
we
should
do
a
bad
thing,
which
is
lose
a
green
space.
K
Now
I
worry
that
when
we
talk
about
taking
commuted
sums
to
improve
other
areas,
what
we're
actually
getting
is
a
loss
of
green
space,
a
net
loss.
So
at
the
moment
we've
got
a
pitch
there
that
will
go,
others
will
be
improved,
yes,
but
it's
a
net
loss,
and
so
at
the
moment
I'm
really
struggling
to
put
my
hand
up
and
support
this,
not
because
I
don't
think
the
housing
there's
a
housing
need
and
not.
K
P
Yeah
there's
a
bit
of
a
mixture
of
that
one.
Wasn't
it
and
I
I
feel
a
bit
rusty,
actually
having
not
been
in
here
for
nearly
two
years.
It's
you
know.
It's
everybody
else
is
feeling
a
bit
nervous.
I
think
I
am
actually
unusually
for
this,
but
to
try
and
address
that
comment.
I'll,
just
refer
back
to
paragraph
40,
which
goes
through
the
three
exceptions,
but
before
I
get
to
that,
it's
interesting.
P
Isn't
it
that
when
you
look
back
that
sport
england
themselves
initially
didn't
consider
themselves
to
be
a
statutory
console
t
it
was
the
city
council
had
to
point
out
that
they
were
consulting
and
therefore
they
needed
to
respond
upon
it,
which
they've
done
so
and
you
would
expect
them
to
actually
refer
to
to
the
loss
of
a
picture
with
the
negative
as
as
they
have
done
so,
but
I
think
a
full
and
robust
assessment
was
was
taken
out.
P
I
said
paragraph
40
judges
it
against
the
exceptions
in
paragraph
99
and
obviously
I
wasn't
actually
part
of
the
assessment,
but
it
talks
about
the
quality
of
the
pitch
and
acknowledges
that
there
are
issues
with
it.
P
Certainly,
at
the
time
that
this
assessment
was
done,
I
don't
want
to
read
it
all
out,
but
it
talks
about
in
part
a
carried
out
extensive
assessment
work
regarding
all
public
and
private
green
space
to
underpin
green
space
designation
ladder
data,
the
assessment
scored
all
open
spaces
out
of
10,
with
old
field
lane
scoring
0.66
out
of
10.,
so
not
even
one.
P
This
is
also
echoed
within
the
leads
gateway,
spd,
etc.
It
goes
on
a
bit
and
then
it
makes
reference
to
other
pictures
that
are
available
in
better
condition
nearby
and
ultimately
the
consideration
was
made
that
the
open
space
was
so
poor.
They
did
not
provide
a
meaningful
function
as
green
space
as
far
back
as
2010.
It's
only
recently,
obviously
that
the
community's
taking
it
on
board.
I
did
walk
across
it.
P
It
does
actually
acknowledge,
as
well
as
the
report
that
that
it
is
a
potentially
loss
of
green
space,
but
then,
like
all
applications,
it
takes
in
balance
the
benefits
that
this
application
would
bring
forward,
which
we've
talked
about
and
ultimately
comes
to
that
conclusion-
that
this
should
be
recommendation
recommended
for
approval,
but
fully
acknowledges
the
the
the
the
input
of
sport,
england
and,
I
think,
has
given
you
that
proper
weight
in
terms
of
the
decision-making,
but
the
backstop
of
all
of
this,
as
if
members
and
I
just
would
remind
members
of
this,
this
application
should
be
approved.
P
As
the
recommendation.
We
still
have
to
refer
this
to
secretary
of
state
and
the
secretary
of
state
will
provide
you
with
all
the
documentation,
including
knowledge
of
the
the
sport
england's
objection,
and
then
the
secretary
of
state
will
ultimately
make
the
decision
as
to
whether
to
take
that
further.
So
I
think
all
of
those
points
have
been
closed
off
as
far
as
reasonably
the
city
council
could
could
actually
do.
J
Thanks
chair,
perhaps
sports
england
were
too
busy
on
their
own
playing
pitch
strategy
to
figure
out.
They
were
statutory,
consultees
they're
as
confused
as
I
am
about
the
whole
thing.
At
this
particular
point.
J
I
cannot
support
this
recommendation
because
it
seems
to
me
that
the
mppf
paragraph
99
is
contradicted
by
the
sap
and,
as
far
as
I
understand
the
pecking
order
on
such
things,
the
mpp
mppf
trumps.
The
sap
at
this
particular
point,
because
I
do
note
and
steve's
referred
to
as
referred
it
to
as
a
pala.
J
The
analysis
of
panel
99,
which
talks
about
the
loss
resulting
from
proposed
development,
will
be
replaced
by
equivalent
or
better
provision
in
terms
of
quantity
and
quality
in
a
suitable
location.
So
it's
an
and
you
have
to
do
both
you
have
to
provide
a
new
pitch
of
the
same
quality.
It's
not
just
a
question
of
fiddling
around
with
what
you've
already
got
you've
got
to
provide
the
same.
You've
got
to
provide
the
same
in
terms
of
quantity.
J
Now
the
analysis
underneath
it
says
you've
got
on
all
you
can
either
relocate
within
leads
or
provide
local
improvements
to
existing
facilities,
and
that's
got
to
be
a
contradiction.
You
either
do
an
island.
You
provide
a
new
pitch
that
is
of
the
same
quantity
and
quality
or
in
this
particular
case
you're
knocked
out
of
the
mppf
power
99
by
just
saying
we'll
just
improve
workly
wreck,
which
I
think
we
all
accept
at
this
particular
point
is
in
poor
quality.
J
I
never
did
get
a
clear
answer
to
why
it
was
crossed
last
time.
Perhaps
it
was
this
discussion
and
debate
at
that
point.
I
can't
quite
remember
myself,
but
ultimately
we're
in
a
situation
where,
regardless
of
the
fact
that
it's
been
allocated
in
the
sap,
the
sap
was
based
upon
a
housing
target
that
was
totally
naturally
unrealistic
and
has
subsequently
been
reviewed.
J
Now
as
much
as
I'd
love,
council,
housing
in
my
world,
and
everybody
would
on
this
particular
council,
the
fact
that
you're
paying
one
and
a
half
million
before
you're
even
laying
a
break
is
a
puzzle,
because
I
am
sure
there
are
other
brownfield
sites
within
the
council's
ownership
that
you
could
better
spend
that
one
and
a
half
million
on
so
don't
necessarily
be
seduced
by
the
fact
that
it's
all
about
council
housing
and
it's
a
great
thing.
It's
a
price
to
be
paid
before
we
actually
get
to
that
big
particular
point.
P
Unfortunately,
there
are
page
numbers
on
mine,
but
if
we
can
go
back
to
paragraph
40
and
can
we
go
to
where
it
says,
paragraph
99
states
and
just
skipping
past
a
but
we
get
to
b,
there's
a
there's,
a
key
word
in
the
middle
of
that
paragraph,
where
it
says
the
loss
resulting
from
the
proposed
development
would
be
replaced
by
equivalent,
which
is
councillor
finnegan's
point
or
better,
and
obviously
it's.
The
second
point
that
the
council
is
concentrating
on
in
here
in
terms
of
the
better
provision.
So
I
think
that
point
is
quite
clear.
P
I
mean
it's
not
really
appropriate
to
go
back
into
the
sap
again
now.
I
think
at
this
particular
point
because
it
took
an
awful
long
time
to
get
there.
So
I
have
absolutely
no
intention
of
doing
that
and
there
are
better
people
placed
than
I
to
do
so.
But
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
clear
and
I
think
nicole,
wants
to
clarify
the
crushing
point.
M
Thank
you,
chen
sorry.
We
didn't
get
to
come
back
to
that
previously.
I
just
want
to
get
the
actual
wording
of
the
question.
As
we
know
it's
not
relevant
for
your
considerations
today,
but
just
because,
because
you've
asked
the
specific
question,
if
you
just
bear
with
me
I'll
get
the
I'll
get
the
actual
wording.
M
So
the
council,
the
the
the
challenge,
was
made
on
several
grounds,
but
the
mata
was
only
agreed
to
consent
to
quash
on
one
ground,
and
that
was
that
the
council
accepted
that
it
erred
in
law
in
the
mis
in
as
it
misinterpreted
paragraph
97
of
the
nppf.
Now
that
was
the
2019
npps
since
then,
we've
got
the
21,
and
that
is
now
what
is
paragraph
99.
M
So
it's
the
same
paragraph
we're
talking
about
and
and
and
we
did
and
we
accepted
that
we
did
that
because
we
misinterpreted
the
term
existing
open
space
as
a
as
excluding
open
space
which
is
allocated
for
development
in
the
in
the
development
plan.
And
as
you
can
see
from
your
report
today,
we
acknowledge
that
the
land
is
allocated
in
the
development
plan.
But
we
also
acknowledge
that,
notwithstanding
that,
you
still
have
to
assess
that
open
space
as
per
paragraph
99,
which
is
what
the
report
sets
out
in
full.
G
Thank
you
chair.
I
don't
think
I
can
support
this
application
today.
I
do
agree.
We
need
affordable
homes
and
when
there's
an
opportunity
to
build
a
hundred
percent
of
affordable
homes,
it's
a
very
difficult
decision
to
make,
but
this
site
is
actually
owned
by
two
organizations:
sports
club
and
league
city
council
who
should
have
been
looking
after
this
site.
I
mean
to
to
come
and
say,
come
and
say
today
that
it's
in
poor
condition.
Therefore,
we've
got
to
put
housing
on
it.
G
It's
not
fair
to
the
local
community
and,
like
we
often
discuss
in
private
after
meetings
like
this,
we
always
say:
wouldn't
it
be
nice
if
developers
could
do
a
little
bit
more
and
do
a
little
bit
better?
G
This
time
we
have
the
opportunity,
because
it's
our
offices-
and
I
think
our
offices
need
to
go
away
and
consider
whether
they
can
do
better
and
potentially
split
the
site,
so
they
can
still
have
the
sports
facilities
that
people
in
that
area
have
shown
and
demonstrated
they
desperately
want
to
keep,
as
well
as
putting
a
few
affordable
homes
on
there
as
well.
Thank
you,
chair.
I
Thank
you
chair,
and
I
say
it's
amazing
that
colleagues
tend
to
like
to
forget
policy
when
it
doesn't
suit
their
particular
interests.
So
let's
be
really
clear
about
this
on
a
personal
level,
I
feel
incredibly
sorry
for
the
residents
of
this
area.
I
We
have
to
make
a
decision
based
on
our
adopted
policies
and
the
legal
expertise
of
our
officers
and
the
interpretation
of
our
local
development
plan,
the
mppf
and
the
other
things,
and
on
that
basis
this
has
been
through
inspection.
It
has
been
through
challenge,
it
has
been
adopted.
It
has
had
a
more
rigorous
challenge
on
the
green
space.
I
I
We
are
here
to
make
difficult
decisions
on
the
requirements
that
this
city
needs
between
green
space,
economic
development,
housing,
space
and
everything
else,
and
on
the
basis
of
our
policies
which
we
have
adopted
and
which
some
people
in
this
room
and
I'm
choosing
to
ignore
for
convenience.
This
meets
those
qualifications.
I
If
we
don't
approve
it
for
provision,
that's
not
to
say
that
the
officers
need
to
do
a
really
damn
good
job
when
it
comes
to-
and
I
accept
the
point
that
there's
potential-
that
this
space
could
be
split
up
and
that
actually
the
potential
quantum
of
housing
is
potentially
excessive
and
that
there
is
a
deal
to
be
done
in
terms
of
a
compromise,
but
to
pretend
that
this
has
not
been
through
rigor.
Just
because
it
sounds
good
on
a
recording
that
will
go
out
to
the
public
is
not
how
we
do
policy
in
this
council.
A
P
P
P
Sorry,
the
chair's
just
referring
to
me,
but
really
the
only
thing
to
be
done
now
to
after
the
debates
and
comments,
is
really
if
a
member
of
the
panel
is
prepared
to
move
the
officer
recommendation,
the
report
and,
if
it
to
be
seconded.
F
A
A
B
M
Chair
you
vote,
so
you
voted
but
because
it's
an
inequality,
a
vote
of
those
people
present,
then
you
get
a
cast
and
vote.
P
Chair
just
for
absolute
clarity
on
that
basis,
the
officer
recommendation
to
approve
the
application
subject
to
referral
to
the
secretary
of
state,
as
as
has
been
moved
with
the
chair
exercising
the
casting
vote.
Thank
you
chair
thank.
A
B
A
N
Just
do
your
microphone!
Sorry!
Thank
you
chair.
Yes,
this
application
was
previously
reported
to
the
29th
of
april
panel,
but
it
was
deferred
for
a
site
visit.
Unfortunately,
at
the
time
we
haven't
been
able
to
carry
out
site
visits
just
because
of
the
current
situation,
so
it
was
deferred
and
sun
until
such
a
time
that
we
could
have
that
visit
type
visit,
which
was
obviously
this
morning.
N
There
are
some
new
panel
members
and
indeed
a
new
chair
since
the
last
panel
meeting.
So
ordinarily,
I
would
just
do
an
update
or
summary,
but
I
think
it's
only
fair
that
I
go
through
the
full
presentation,
not
least
just
to
give
the
new
panel
members
the
full
picture.
So
they've
got
the
full
information
in
front
of
them
to
make
an
informed
decision
this
afternoon
it
was
initially
brought
to
the
plans
panel
at
the
request
of
a
ward
member,
for
the
reasons
set
out
in
the
report.
N
It's
a
part
allocated
and
par
an
allocated
employment
site
within
the
the
development
plan.
However,
it
is
all
used
for
commercial
purposes
now,
in
terms
of
looking
at
the
adjoining
land
uses.
You've
got
the
railway
line
to
the
north.
You
clearly
see
that
on
the
site
plan,
you've
got
employment,
uses
to
the
east,
an
area
of
open
space
to
the
south
and
south
west,
and
also
a
primary
school
to
the
southwest
as
well.
N
There
is
a
number
of
houses
that
share
a
boundary
along
the
north,
also
along
the
western
edge
towards
the
north
western
corner.
As
you
can
see
from
the
plan
there,
the
other
residential
properties
are
marsborough
place
to
the
south
east.
Coincidentally,
this
is
almost
immediately
next
to
the
site
that
we
just
considered.
So
it's
a
bit
of
a
coincidence.
We've
got
two
sites
that
are
very
close
to
each
other
on
consecutive
items
on
the
same
panel,
which
obviously
has
nothing
to
do
with
each
other.
N
There
is
a
difference
in
levels
on
the
site
as
well.
The
housing
to
the
to
the
west
boundary
is
elevated,
somewhat
above
the
application
site
by
some
three
to
four
meters
in
height.
N
In
terms
of
the
the
planning
history
planning,
permission
was
originally
granted
in
2017
for
change
of
use
of
the
land
and
for
a
containerized
storage
facility,
which
would
accommodate
249
individual
units
at
2.4
meters
in
height,
and
those
are
some
photographs
of
the
site
in
question.
These
kind
of
storage
container
units
are
used
for
commercial
businesses
and
indeed,
for
homeowners
or
individual
people
who
want
to
rent
space
within
storage
units.
N
N
However,
the
applicant
over
a
period
of
time
breached
those
conditions
and
we
did
get
noise.
Nuisance
complements
that
the
site
was
being
used
by
customers
during
anti-social
hours
beyond
those
permitted
hours,
which
resulted
in
enforcement
investigations
taking
place
and
also
there
were
breaches
in
terms
of
how
the
site
was
laid
out
with
regard
to
the
sighting
of
the
containers
in
that
they
weren't
located
in
the
correct
locations,
as
was
evidenced
this
morning,
and
also
some
of
those
containers
had
been
put
along
the
western
boundary
with
the
adjoining
housing
development
instead
of
being
used
for
landscaping.
N
N
N
That's
the
drawing
numbers
which
lists
all
the
approved
drawings,
but
also
try
to
regularize
all
the
breaches
of
planning
control
that
have
taken
place.
So
the
proposal
is
to
increase
the
number
of
units
on
site.
These
are
the
photographs
of
the
site
in
question.
This
is
the
access
from
chelsea
close
that
we
observed
this
morning,
and
these
are
pictures
of
some
of
the
containers
that
are
on
site
at
the
moment,
which
are
not
in
accordance
with
the
2017
permission.
I
might
add
I'll.
Just
take
you
through
a
few
of
the
photos.
N
In
terms
of
the
the
current
proposal,
I
think
proposed
to
increase
the
number
of
containers
from
249
to
373,
so
that's
an
increase
of
120
four
units
in
total
part
of
which
this
would
involve
an
intensification
of
the
location
of
the
units
on
site.
So,
if
I
take
you
to
the
2017
approval,
so
that
picture
in
front
of
you
there,
that's
the
2017
consented
scheme,
which
includes
249
storage
units,
all
single
stacked.
N
I
think
most
relevant
to
notice
that
down
the
western
boundary
doesn't
contain
any
containers
at
all.
So
that's
devoid
of
any
development
other
than
providing
additional
landscaping.
That
hasn't
happened
and
this
application
seeks
to
remedy
that
breach
and
intensify.
The
current
use
there's
also
a
planting
scheme
which
has
been
approved,
which
also
hasn't
been
fully
implemented
along
the
western
boundary
and
also
there
would
be
a
number
of
car
parking
spaces
that
would
be
provided.
So
that's
the
consented
scheme.
N
31
locations
in
total,
which
would
be
double
stacked
and
the
applicant
positioned
one
of
the
units
on
top
of
the
units
this
morning.
To
make
sure,
can
you
show
the
point?
Okay,
yeah?
If
you
look
at
the
main
screen,
just
behind
me
I'll
show
you
where
the
double
stacked
units
are.
There
are
actually
darker
in
color
on
this
plan,
so
it's
there's
a
bank
there's
a
bank
there
and
a
bank
there,
not
not
the
ones,
not
the
ones
on
the
boundary,
but
the
ones
just
above
it.
That's
that's
two
more
just
in
that
location.
N
That's
31
up
to
31
locations
in
total,
there'll
be
14.
Car
parking
spaces
and
access
would
still
remain
the
same
from
chelsea
close,
which
we
observed
and
access
the
site
this
morning.
The
hours
would
be
exactly
the
same
as
the
2017
approval,
so
there's
no
increase
in
hours
proposed
conditions
to
be
imposed.
N
We
would
require
the
applicant
to
make
sure
that
a
robust
landscaping
scheme
is
implemented,
so
not
the
one
that's
already
approved,
but
a
new
lambda
gaping
scheme,
which
would
include
extra
heavy
standard
trees
along
the
western
and
also
the
southern
boundary
as
well,
and
also
any
tree
replacement.
Should
those
trees
be
lost
or
die,
but
also
to
include
a
management
plan
as
well
dealing
with
how
the
site
would
be
managed
to
avoid
any
anti-social
behavior,
which
has
happened
in
the
past.
N
But
I
understand
you
know
from
speaking
to
world
members
that
those
issues
have
died
down
somewhat
in
terms
of
the
issues
for
members
consideration.
Today.
Visual
appearance
is
one
the
visual
appearance
of
the
intensification
of
the
units
which
would
take
place
in
all
areas
of
the
site,
particularly
on
the
northern
part
of
the
site,
where
there
are
gaps
currently
on
in
on
place.
N
N
As
well
interesting
how
they
would
be
accessed
as
well,
because
you
know
we
asked
questions
on
site
this
morning
as
well,
and
there
would
be
a
case
of
cutting
out
areas
within
some
of
the
units
to
create
steps
that
lead
up
towards
the
double
stacked
units,
but
also
cutting
through
internally
the
units
to
create
central
corridors,
so
that
units
could
be
accessed
either
side
of
a
of
a
central
corridor.
N
N
As
I
said
earlier,
it
was
deferred
at
panel
on
29th
for
a
site
visit
to
take
place,
and
it
was
helpful
for
members
who
visited
the
site
this
morning
to
see
the
relationship.
I
think
panel
members
were
concerned
that
they
didn't
get
the
full
picture.
Looking
at
the
photographs
from
last
time-
and
I
agree-
it's
no
substitute
for
actually
visiting
a
site
yourself
to
see
on-site,
how
it
transpires
and
what
the
relationship
is,
but
also
part
of
the
deferral,
was
to
seek
clarification
on
a
number
of
issues
as
well.
N
Those
comments
on
the
units
on
the
southern
side
of
the
site,
particularly
on
the
ground
floor
and
how
they
would
be
accessed
the
longer
units
along
the
southern
boundary,
would
only
have
one
access
point
on
the
northern
elevation,
so
there
would
be
no
need
to
to
enter
into
this
vegetation
on
the
south.
So
the
bottom
units
on
the
ground
floor
are
double
length
in
terms
of
noise
as
well.
The
containers,
as
I've
said,
have
been
removed
from
the
western
boundary,
so
the
noise
levels
have
been
reduced
in
this
particular
location
and
environmental.
N
In
the
past
anti-social
behavior
cars
driving
around
the
site,
I
think
the
managers
and
the
owners
of
the
site,
the
operators
of
the
site
have
got
a
better
grip
on
that
now
and
managing
the
the
site
in
a
more
responsible
and
professional
manner.
I
think
that
could
be
observed
this
morning.
It
was
very
neat
and
clean
and
tidy,
and
also
in
terms
of
noise,
the
double
stacked
units
once
in
place.
They
wouldn't
be
removed
and
taken
taken
away
and
taken
down
again
once
once
they're
there.
They
are
there.
N
There
also
details
of
levels
and
sections
as
well.
That
members
asked
for-
and
I
think
members
could
appreciate
the
the
difference
in
levels
on
the
site
this
morning
and
the
bottom
section
through
through
the
site
shows
how
the
double
stacked
units
would
relate
to
the
existing
levels
on
site,
so
the
bottom
left-hand
corner
of
that
drawing
shows
double
stacked
units
in
relation
to
the
site,
office
and
cabin
in
relation
to
the
single
units
and
also
the
housing
further
further
up
as
well.
N
N
N
Having
said
that,
when
customers
do
come
to
the
site,
they
just
drive
to
their
own
individual
units
and
then
unload
or
load
their
goods
from
there
there
are
objections
from
local
residents
are
set
up
within
the
report,
and
there
are
also
objections
from
all
ward
members.
Again
set
out
in
the
report,
I
would
also
add,
since
the
publication
of
the
report,
the
ward
member
has
forwarded
on
three
representations,
the
comments
of
which
are
the
objects
to
the
detailed
or
double
stacked
units
and
the
use
of
forklift
trucks.
N
I
think
I'm
right
in
thinking
that
there
would
be
no
use
of
forklift
trucks
in
terms
of
the
double
stack
units,
because
once
they're
in
position,
they
are
returned
there
in
terms
of
the
increase
in
noise
and
anti-social
behavior.
I
think
again
that
has
been
reduced
since
the
site's
been
managed
in
a
more
professional
manner.
N
They
are
adhering
to
the
permitted
hours
and
we
would
add
additional
conditions
requiring
a
management
plan
to
deal
with
any
anti-social
behaviour
that
might
arise,
bearing
in
mind
all
those
factors
and
what
we've
seen
on
site
this
morning,
the
application
is
recommended
for
approval
with
all
the
conditions.
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you.
A
K
When
we
discussed
this
last
time,
it
was
pointed
out
to
us
that
the
applicant
was
a
bit
lacks
in
sticking
to
the
conditions
that
were
already
imposed
on
site.
So
I
suppose
my
first
question
is:
are
they
now
compliant
with
that.
K
The
site
also
appears
to
be
used
for
car
storage.
Is
that
included
within
the
conditions
and
will
that
cease
if
they
expand
and
the
third
one-
and
it
was
probably
remiss
of
us
because
we
didn't
we
didn't
actually
have
a
look
this
morning-
is
there's
a
second
entrance
onto?
Is
it
amberly
road,
it's
very
faint
on
here,
which
I'm
just
wondering
how
they're
going
to
manage
that
entrance
to
prevent
its
use
it's
or
it's
unauthorized
use.
N
Yeah
in
terms
of
the
the
first
question,
compliant
with
the
conditions
now,
as
far
as
am
I
aware,
they
are
compliant
with
the
conditions,
particularly
relating
to
the
the
opening
hours.
What
they're
not
compliant
is
with
is,
with
the
the
approved
plans,
in
that
the
approved
layout
has
not
been
done
in
accordance
with
with,
what's
being
proved
and
put
on
site.
The
location
and
sighting
of
the
units
doesn't
correspond
with
the
the
approved
plan
and
also
the
landscaping.
That's
that's
set
out
in
the
conditions
that
hasn't
been
done,
as
per
the
2017
permission.
N
So
in
approving
this
particular
application,
if
approved,
then
there
are
conditions
to
ensure
that
the
landscaping
is
done
in
accordance
with
with
a
landscaping
plan
that
we've
got,
which
provides
a
scheme
to
show
heavy
extra
heavy
standard
trees
along
the
southern
and
western
boundaries
and
additional
landscaping-
and
indeed
I
think
the
applicant
have
has
also
already
started
to
plant
some
of
the
trees
along
the
western
boundary
along
that
embankment.
N
So
there
are
current
breaches
at
the
moment.
I
think
the
applicant
acknowledges
that,
but
this
application
seeks
to
to
remedy
those
breaches
and
address
the
issues
in
terms
of
the
car
storage.
That's
not
something
that's
set
out
in
the
2017
commission,
but
it's
you
know
it
is
the
parking
of
vehicles
which
isn't
a
permanent
structure
or
building.
Having
said
that,
the
permission
doesn't
allow
for
external
storage
of
vehicles.
N
The
current
permission
looking
or
the
current
application,
which
is
currently
proposed,
doesn't
show
any
scope
within
the
site
for
any
external
storage,
including
cars.
So
that's
not
part
of
this.
This
planning
application
before
us
and
in
terms
of
the
secondary
entrance
on
amberley
road
there's
a
condition
which
requires
a
scheme
of
signage
to
be
submitted
to
ensure
that
the
customers
coming
to
the
site
use
the
primary
access
on
chelsea
plus,
which
in
reality
is
a
better
access,
because
it's
a
lot
wider
and
it
takes
you
right
into
the
customer
entrance
as
well.
G
Thank
you
chair.
My
question
was
we've
got
about
the
cars
as
well?
If
you
look
at
google
there's
over
66
cars
on
site,
so
can
I
just
have
some
reassurance
from
officers
that
they
will
bottom
this
out,
that
we're
not
going
to
get
these
additional
units
and
66
cars?
It's
one
or
the
other
place.
N
Yeah,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
the
layout,
there's
actually
no
scope
to
fit
66
cars
on
the
site.
There
are
circulation
areas
around
the
storage
units
to
ensure
that
to
ensure
that
forklifts
and
customers
can
access
the
unit
so
there's
I
can't
see
actually
anywhere
on
the
site.
Planner.
Thank
you
for
bringing
that
up.
N
I
can't
see
anywhere
on
the
site
plan
that
would
allow
any
areas
for
any
external
storage,
whether
that
be
vehicles
or
otherwise,
because
of
the
intensification
of
it,
because
all
of
the
areas
would
accommodate
the
the
units
themselves,
save
for
the
circulation
areas
for
vehicles.
G
Do
you
think
it
would
be
acceptable,
though,
if
they
chose
not
to
put
a
row
of
containers
in
to
put
cars
in
instead,
because
that's
obviously
what
they
did
last
time?
Wasn't
it
I'm
not
saying
I'm
opposed
either
way?
I
just
would
like
to
the
residents
to
have
a
clear
picture
of
what
they're
actually
going
to
get
on
that
site.
N
Yeah
I
mean
it's
clearly
not
set
out
on
the
planet,
any
external
storage
and
if
members
have
got
any
concerns,
I
think
it
would
be
reasonable
to
employ
impose
a
condition
that
no
external
storage
of
goods
are
stored
on
site,
so
you've
got
everything
neat
and
tidy
in
you
know
the
units
themselves.
So
I
think,
if
members
do
have
those
concerns
quite
legitimate
to
impose
a
condition
to
that
effect.
L
I
wasn't
expecting
to
be
on
quite
so
soon.
Thank
you.
Is
there
any
scope
to
instruct
the
applicant
to
actually
use
the
current
layout
before
we
start
double
stacking?
L
N
Yes,
it
would
be,
it
would
be
preferable
to
incrementally
build
build
the
site
up.
But,
as
you
understand
it,
it's
a
it's
a
response
of
the
applicant
with
regard
to
the
the
demand
from
customers
of
the
need
to
to
have
as
many
units
on
there
as
they
can.
Bearing
in
mind,
we
don't
want
to
completely
see
the
site
of
developed,
so
this
is
a
response
or
to
the
applicant's
business
model.
I
suppose
and
high
demand
for
units
at
this
current
moment-
and
this
is
the
scheme
before
us-
that
we
that
we
have
to
assess.
P
Just
just
just
whilst
they're
getting
themselves
settled,
I
just
looked
at
google
maps,
so
councillor
colin
is
making
a
very
valid
point.
It
looks
like
it's
2021
this
there's
a
huge
number
of
vehicles
on
there,
there's
not
as
many
containers
either
I
have
to
say
so.
It's
obviously
changed
since
this
photograph,
so
it's
appropriate.
P
I
think
the
condition
was
put
on
for
the
external
storage
as
adam
suggested,
but
it
was
interesting
today,
sorry
on
site,
by
way
of
introduction
how
these
things
were
going
to
be
operated
in
terms
of
cutting
the
doors
through
and
access
and
all
the
rest
of
it.
It
might
be
worthwhile,
as
the
chair
suggested,
giving
the
applicant
the
the
opportunity
to
to
articulate
that,
because
it
was
interesting.
R
No
chad,
I
think
I
heard
the
question
I'll
answer
first
and
then
I'll.
Let
mr
basheed
talk
about
the
the
cutting
of
the
containers,
but
in
relation
to
the
external
storage
of
the
cars
it
there
won't
be
any
external
of
the
store
storage
of
any
external
storage
in
in.
If
this
is
approved,
it'll
just
be
the
containers
and
with
the
access
ways
around
in
terms
of
the
double
stacking
again,
we're
happy
to
look
at
just
single
single
story
as
a
stage
one
there
is
demand.
I
mean
I
almost
put
it
in.
R
We
talked
about
infrastructure
in
terms
of
the
previous
application
about
roads
and
shops.
There
is
such
demand
for
storage
and
that's
why
it's
been
successful.
That's
why
it's
it's!
It's
so
much
more
well
managed
over
the
last
four
years.
It's
a
well-used
facility.
People
know
where
it
is.
People
use
the
main
access
road,
it's
it's
there's!
You
may
not
have
gone
into
the
office
area,
but
there's
a
sheet
up
which
tells
customers
exactly
what
they're
allowed
to
do
and
what
they're
not
allowed
to
do
and
it's
being
well
run.
R
And
so
it
could
be
phased
such
that
it's
all
at
ground,
floor
level
to
start
with,
and
then
there
could
be
a
condition
in
relation
to
phase
two,
which
will
be
the
upper
levels.
When,
when
demand
demand
is
there
which,
which
we
know
there
will
be.
A
Sorry
I
was
just
looking
at
the
google
map
and
because
the
collins
is
quite
right,
could
you
just
clarify
why
so
many
cars
parked
on
the
google
map?
Because
it
said
2021.
P
Yes,
sorry,
as
far
as
we
can
tell
from
this
photograph,
it
was
2021.
This
photograph
was
taken
and
there's
a
whole
bank
of
containers
missing
that
were
there
today.
So
that's
obviously
part
of
the
reason
why
there
weren't
that
many
vehicles,
but
it
just
helps
us
understand
how
this
site
operates.
If
you
would
please
no.
S
P
No
on
this
one
there's
effectively
three
rows,
which
included
the
one
where
the
pink
cadillac
was
yeah
I'll
show
you
it'll
probably
be
easy.
S
Mapping
the
google
map
image
you
have
there
is
it's
not
recent.
It
is
literally
three
four
years
old,
so
this
is
in
the
very
early
days
when
we're
developing
that
area,
the
whole
site
wasn't
developed
in
one
go
initially,
we
only
started
with
20
containers
near
the
chelsea
close
area
and
the
first
year
we
didn't
even
go
up
into
the
the
other
side,
the
two
and
a
half
acres.
There
were
not
even
used
in
the
first
year,
so
it's
been
slowly
developed
over
time.
S
G
B
S
Like
I
said,
the
development
was
in
phases.
Under
the
first
phase,
we
were
only
developing
the
first
acre,
very
close
to
the
chelsea
close
road.
S
Subsequently,
as
we
have
moved
up,
there
was
trees
planted
along
the
western
boundary
in
terms
of
our
own
experience,
which
I'm
admitting
we
didn't
manage
those
plants
very
effectively,
and
that
was
more
of
a
learning
point
for
us
as
to
how
to
manage
newly
grow.
A
newly
planted
trees
and
one
example
I
can
give
you
is
that
we
weren't
trimming
the
the
weeds
down
that
area
and
the
trees
were
smothered
and
died.
S
In
the
first
year,
we've
subsequently
planted
more
trees,
we've
employed
a
maintenance
chap
who
works
there
full
time,
and
he
now
trims
all
the
weeds
around
that
boundary
on
a
two
weekly
basis
during
the
summer
to
make
sure
the
trees
survive
and
grow.
Once
the
trees
get
to
a
certain
height,
then
the
weeds
don't
need
to
be
trimmed
as
regularly,
but
this
is
again
a
learning
point
for
us
for
when
we
started
to
to
now
in
terms
of
where
we
are
today.
P
Really
clear
about
this
photograph.
Obviously
the
non-compliance
is
not
relevant
to
this
application,
but
it
does
give
an
understanding
of
how
this
site
has
developed.
That
was
the
main
reason
I
thought
members
should
know
about
it.
So
actually
the
non-compliance
within
this
photograph
is
not
actually
relevant
to
the
decision
making
here.
Thank
you.
A
K
Oh,
you
know
it's
almost
impossible
to
stop
me.
That's
why
you
did
that?
Okay
right,
okay,
I
think
I
was
one
of
the
people
who,
when
we
first
discussed
this
via
zoom
who
who
basically
said
I
can't
understand
the
site
and
asked
for
the
site
visit,
and
it
was
really
useful.
I
think,
going
on
site
today,
because
if
nothing
else,
I
now
understand
a
little
better,
the
vagaries
of
the
storage
container
business,
which
seems
quite
bizarre
to
me.
K
But
there
we
are-
and
I
think
I
understand
I
understand
what
the
owners
are
trying
to
do.
Okay
and
if
I'm
honest,
when
we
were
on
site
today,
the
site
looked
clean.
It
looked
well
cared
for,
it
looked
well
organized,
and
so
I
can
only
go
by
what
we
saw.
K
K
K
The
second
point
is
they
planted
a
lot
of
whips
this
high,
and
I
take
a
point
that
was
raised
on
site,
which
is,
it
will
be
some
time
before
they're
tall
enough
to
obscure
the
view
for
the
residents
who
were
affected
on
that
western
side
and
those
residents
do
look
out
on
a
pretty
unpleasant
site
really.
K
But
you
know
the
site's
been
there
a
while
and
it's
an
employee,
it's
an
industrial
employment
site.
Isn't
it
so
you're
going
to
expect
that
so
can
we
within
the
planning,
the
planting
agreement,
insists
that
we
get
some
semi-standard
trees
planted
in
there
with
a
maintenance
agreement
so
that
over
two
or
three
years
it
will
in
fact
soften
up
that
landscape?
K
I'd
also
like
to
suggest
that
if
you,
if
you
look
on
your
map,
you'll
see
there's
an
office
block
which
is
outlined
in
white
on
the
western
side
below
that
there's
space
for
two
containers.
K
Actually
you
can
that's
the
one
point
where
you
can
see
into
the
site
from
from
the
the
neighbouring
schools
recreation
area,
and
so
I
would
suggest
that
we
ask
them
to
remove
those
two
spaces
and
again
plant
up
within
that
space
again
to
to
soften
the
view
around
the
corner.
It's
not
so
bad
because
on
the
council,
land
there's
quite
a
quite
a
lot
of
trees,
etc.
So
you
can't
see
so.
Can
I
suggest
those
two.
P
Before
we
move
on,
can
I
ask
adam
to
address
those
for
the
plans
panel
because
it
needs
to
be
clear:
doesn't
it
about
the
numbers
etc
in
the
trees
and
what
we're
talking
about.
N
Yeah,
I
think
I
think
we
can
nail
down
a
condition
to
limit
the
the
applicant
to
the
number
of
single
and
double
stacked
units.
So
you
know
you
could
have
two
373
in
total,
of
which
no
more
than
31
should
be
double
stacked,
which
shall
be
in
accordance
with
the
plan
set
out
before
you
in
relation
to
the
removal
of
the
double
stat
units
adjacent
to
the
offices.
I
think
that's
that's
a
discussion
that
we
can
have
with
the
applicant,
I
think
from
speaking
to
them
this
morning.
N
K
P
S
I
mean,
apart
from
the
planning
application,
we
were
looking
to
see
how
we
can
soften
the
certain
areas
along
there,
and
we
were
also
considering,
for
example,
growing
climbing
iv
along
the
certain
areas
to
reduce
the
amount
of
impact
on
the
neighbors.
So
in
terms
of
additional
planting
of
trees,
and
things
for
us
is,
is
not
an
issue
at
all.
N
I'm
going
to
just
point
out
as
well.
The
the
planting
that
is
proposed
is
heavy
standard
trees
along
the
southern
boundary
in
western
boundary.
Looking
at
the
2017
planning
permission
and
the
landscaping
scheme
actually
didn't
include
any
extra
heavy
standard
trees.
So
this
would
be
a
better
landscaping
scheme
anywhere,
but
I
I
think
I
admit
that
you
could
get
better
landscaping
in
here
and
it
seems
to
me
as
though
the
applicant
would
be
willing
to
do
that.
N
So
our
you
know,
my
suggestion
would
be
not
to
approve
the
plans
before
us,
but
to
negotiate
and
get
better
quality
plans
which
show
better
quality
landscaping
and
more
of
it
and,
together
with
the
removal
of
those
double
stack
units
next
to
the
office.
F
I
just
want
to
say
chair
that
I
was
one
of
the
one
who
requests
the
site
visit
before
we
made
a
decision.
However,
I
was
unable
to
attend,
and
thanks
colin
for
explaining
everything
today
with
me
not
being
there
and
we're
gonna
also
say
that
each
time
this
application
comes
towards
us,
there
seem
to
be
some
further
issue.
So
adam
has
just
made
a
suggestion
or
recommendation,
and
I
would
would
support
that.
You
know,
because,
obviously
the
landscaping
wasn't
done,
then
there
was
issues
with
residents
with
noise
etc.
F
You
know,
so
we
need
to
bottom
it
out
and
get
a
proper
application
with
things
going
forward
and
I'm
really
shocked
and
surprised
that,
with
regards
to
the
planting,
they
they
planted
little
sapling.
You
know
obviously
there's
a
tree
surgeon
and
to
work
outside
the
world
yeah
or
who
you
could
get
advice
from.
You
know
you
know
when
you're
planting
around
your
houses
and
that
and
now
coming
up
about
with
regards
to
to
some
climbing
ivy
and
all
that
those
sort
of
things
need
to
to
be
bottomed
out.
F
I
think
and
then
be
put
in
place
before
we
go
any
further,
because
we
don't
want
later
on
for
residents
to
be
complaining,
the
trees
that
they
planted
had
died
because
they
weren't
trimmed,
etc.
You
know
so
I
I
have
concerns
with
regards
to
approving
this,
even
though
it's
what's
here
today,
but
I
would
take
the
officer's
advice
and
ensure
that
going
forward
everything
is
in
place.
Instead,
we
keep
adding
little
bits
and
pieces
of
condition
and
we're
not
sure
whether
they're
going
to
be
implemented
or
not.
A
J
Finnegan
thanks
chair,
I'm
not
sure
that
rewarding
people
behavior
is
a
good
way
of
approaching
things.
To
be
honest,
this
only
came
to
this
particular
point
because
they
failed
to
comply
with
the
original
planning
permission
in
the
first
place
and
what
is
their
punishment
for
not
complying
more?
If
you
get
rewarded,
you
get
a
bigger
opportunity
to
make
more
money,
so
I
remain
unconvinced
that
whatever
conditions
you
put
on
it,
this
particular
applicant
is
un
inclined
to
comply
with
those
particular
conditions
hasn't
done,
the
previous
one.
B
M
Thank
you
chair.
Sorry,
I
just
need
to
remind
members
of
the
panel
that
this
application
needs
to
be
assessed
on
the
merits
of
the
plan
and
merits,
and
the
previous
conduct
or
current
conduct
of
the
applicant
is
not
a
material
planning
consideration
notwithstanding
that,
I
can
understand
why
members
have
wanted
to
ask
questions
about
that
and
have
concerns
about
that,
but,
as
set
out
in
the
report,
it
is
clear
that
there
is
enforcement
action
going
on
on
that.
M
So
I
must
urge
members
not
to
take
into
consideration
those
details
with
regard
to
the
current
contraventions.
H
P
P
It
seems
to
be
very,
very
low
impact
in
terms
of
the
number
of
vehicles
that
are
coming
on
and
off
the
site,
so
I
don't
think
it
will
make
a
massive
difference
in
terms
of
what
you
would
get
if
you
to
do
a
trix
database
run
in
terms
of
the
movement
on
and
off
the
site,
just
just
following
on
from
that.
I
just
want
to
add.
P
I
know
it's
not
material
considerations
pointed
out
by
nicole,
but
the
applicant
has
now
complied
with
the
hours
of
operation
and
the
antisocial
behavior
has
stopped
so
obviously,
and
the
site
is
significantly
in
better
condition
than
it
has
been
in
the
past.
So
they've
also
been
changing
that
regard,
but
unless
there
are
other
comments
and
questions
actually
what's
kind
of
being
suggested
now
to
me
is
a
different
motion
to
what
we
have
in
front
of
us,
because
it
would
have
to
be
a
deferring
delegate.
P
So
I
just
want
to
put
this
to
members
and
obviously
you
can
consider
this
or
do
whatever
you
should
want
to
do
in
terms
of
the
recommendation.
But
to
my
mind,
it's
actually
now
grant
permission
to
defer
and
delegate
to
the
chief
officer
subject
to
the
addition
of
a
condition
about
the
maximum
of
double
and
single
stack
storage
units,
but
also
the
removal
of
the
lewis.
Can
you
put
the
site
layout
to
a
place
so
we're
clear
on
this?
P
So
the
removal
of
those
containers
of
the
the
drawing
and
the
replacement
there
with
another
extra
heavy
standard
tree.
So
that's
effectively
two
pairs
of
double
stack
storage.
I
I
do
it
in
this
way,
because,
obviously
this
application
has
been
around
for
a
long
time
and
was
deferred
for
a
significant
period
because
of
curving.
So
I'm
hoping
that
members
don't
necessarily
want
it
to
be
brought
back.
I
mean,
if
anything's
different,
to
what
I've
suggested
to
you.
P
Of
course
we
would
have
to
do,
but
if
we
can
actually
add
that
extra
condition
and
secure
the
removal
of
those
containers
and
the
addition
of
an
extra
heavy
standard,
plus
the
references
to
the
additional
planting
from
the
applicant
in
terms
of
creepers
or
whatever
it
was
that
was
referred
to
adam,
will
discuss
that
further
and
that
then
becomes
a
recommendation
which
is
deferring
delegate
subject
to.
If
anybody
wants
to
move
that
or
to
consider
that.
P
P
Thank
you
so
that
application
now
is
approved
in
principle,
deferred
and
delegated
to
the
chief
officer
for
additional
conditions
regarding
no
outside
storage,
the
maximum
number
of
double
stacked
and
single
units
and
alterations
to
the
drawing
which
left
to
be
submitted
and
discussed
with
that
between
the
applicant
and
adam.
Regarding
the
removal
of
four
four
containers
at
that
southern
side
at
site
and
the
replacement
with
an
extra
heavy
standard
tree,
plus
the
other
additional
planting
offered
by
the
applicant.