►
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).
D
C
B
Okay,
well
I,
withdraw
those
remarks
and.
B
No
I'm
sure
it
won't
I,
I,
won't
repeat
the
remarks,
but
obviously
I've
said
so.
Thank
you
for
that
and
it's
a
while
since
I've
been
here
in
the
southern
West,
I
I
did
share
it
in
the
old
days,
but
I
did
enjoy
the
countryside
views
we
don't
often
get
out
in
City
plans
panel.
We
just
see
you
know
a
square
mile
of
this
place.
Really.
You
know
not
much
cows,
not
much
horses
or
sheep
or
grass,
but
it
was
interesting.
Thank
you.
B
Well,
you
know
who
I
am-
and
you
have
just
followed
me
to
share
this
meeting
for
the
day.
Could
I
remind
you
that
today's
meeting
has
been
live
streamed
on
the
lead
city,
council
YouTube,
so
the
public
can
observe
the
meeting
without
needing
to
do
to
be
present.
Southwest
plants
deal
with
applicants,
application
from
the
south,
Northwest
and
west
of
the
city.
B
Thank
you
for
that
please
and
ask
Trish
to
introduce
items
one
to
five.
Please.
A
Thanks
Chad
agenda
item:
one
there's:
no
appeals
against
refusal,
inspection
of
documents,
agenda
item
two
there's
no
items
which
require
the
exclusion
of
the
press
in
the
public
agenda
item
three
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
formal
letter
items
a
gender
item.
Falcon
members
declare
any
interests
thick
silent
as
known
agenda
item.
Five:
apologies
have
been
received
from
councilors
Taylor,
Anderson
and
Reagan
councilors,
Burke
and
McKenna
are
here
and
substitutes.
B
Thank
you,
Trish.
Moving
on
to
agenda
items.
Six
then
please,
minister
of
the
meeting
held
on
the
27th
of
October,
am
I
doing
in
the
usual
way.
I
do
it
and
go
to
a
page
by
Page,
page
nine
page
10.
B
B
M
Apologies
chair
the
reference
from
council's
Alderson
and
Wadsworth
is
the
marked
as
a
late
representation
and
I
made
reference
in
the
meeting
that
it
wasn't
a
late
representation.
It
was
a
further
representation,
so
I
think
that
needs
to
be
highlighted.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
then.
Can
we
move
on
then
to
page
13
the
agenda
item
S7
change
of
use
of
former
Community
Center
into
a
five
bed
apart
Hotel,
including
extension
over
existing
Boiler,
Room,
etc,
etc?
Can
I
to
answer
this?
Okay
John?
Would
you
like
to
introduce
this
report
in
this.
E
This
application
relates
to
change
the
use
of
community
center
to
a
an
apart
hotel
with
Associated
Works.
Members
will
recall
that
this
item
is
previously
considered
the
9th
of
June,
South
and
West
plans.
Panel
meeting
at
the
meeting
offices
raised
concerns
in
relation
to
design
and,
in
particular,
the
impact
on
the
conservation
area
and
the
setting
of
nearby
listed
buildings,
and
there
are
also
some
concerns
in
relation
to
noise
and
whether
the
development
would
provide
a
satisfactory
level
of
immunity
for
the
future
users
of
the
building.
E
The
application
at
the
9th
of
June
panel
was
ultimately
deferred
with
members
seeking
revisions
and
further
information
relating
to
a
variety
of
aspects
of
the
scheme.
I've
covered
these
in
paragraphs
four
and
five
of
the
panel
reports
and
following
this
applicant
has
submitted
some
revised
proposals
and
additional
information
in
line
with
the
members
requests
and
comments,
and
these
are
under
consideration
today
and
just
one
further
thing
to
note
is
you're.
E
Seeing
in
the
panel
report,
we've
now
mentioned
the
Heavenly
neighborhood
plan,
which
has
gained
weight
since
we
were
last
at
panel,
so
there's
actually
a
referendum
on
the
neighborhood
plan
today,
but
we've
given
those
plan
policies
significantly
it's
in
their
office
report
anyway.
E
So,
just
to
recap,
on
the
site,
it's
got
a
prominent
car
on
the
plot
location
there
it's
it's
the
building
in
the
middle
of
the
two-story,
one
which
turns
the
corner
of
North
Lane
and
Bennett
Road.
So
it's
an
attractive,
two-story
property.
It's
got
this
interesting
curved
roof
design
and
the
roofs
you
know
uncluttered
at
the
moment.
So
it's
got
a
permanent
location
in
the
conservation
area
and
it's
considered
to
constitute
a
positive
building
within
the
consolation
area.
E
E
So
an
existing
building,
it's
got
quite
a
tire
depends
at
the
moment
it's
been
vacant
for
for
a
long
time
now,
and
the
farmer
use
was
as
a
community
center
and
it's
been
subject
to
some
vandalism
and
and
graffiti,
and
it's
located
within
the
Hedley
Town
Center
boundary,
and
it's
previously
been
noted
on
the
last
time.
At
panel,
because
just
its
relationship
with
that
Pelican
Crossing
from
the
ark,
you
can
just
see
the
the
traffic
lights
there,
where
people
travel
towards
the
taps.
E
So
that's
just
a
refresher
for
building
folks,
it's
been
quite
a
while,
since
it's
been
to
panel-
and
these
are
the
existing
plans-
I
won't
dwell
on
these
too
much,
and
these
were
the
previous
plans.
So
previously
it
was
put
in
as
an
eight
bedroom
depart
hotel
with
rooms
across
free
floors,
including
the
roof
space,
and
this
was
the
previous
design.
E
So
the
previous
concerns
we
had
were
largely
to
do
with
the
extent
of
a
roof
alteration
so
that
there
was
significant
changes
to
the
roof,
as
well
as
the
introduction
of
a
large
amount
of
Dharma
windows,
and
we
also
had
concerns
regarding
the
window
design,
in
particular
the
lower
in
the
vessels
towards
the
ground
level,
and
this
is
now
what's
what's
proposed,
so
I'll
just
flick
onto
the
elevations
first,
but
the
main
change
is
as
you'll
see
is
the
dharmers
have
been
removed
and
there's
actually
no
accommodation
within
the
in
the
third
foot.
E
Well,
the
second
floor:
within
the
roof
space
now,
there's
been
a
reduction
in
the
number
of
of
rooms
within
the
building
from
a
to
part,
hotel
rooms
to
five
and
there's
been
changes
to
the
fenestration
as
well,
so
that
the
actual
Windows
relate
better
to
existing
openings
and
have
now
got
more
of
a
vertical
emphasis,
which
is
what
we
were
looking
to
achieve.
That
first
time,
there's
been
some
layout
changes
as
well.
E
The
bottom
picture
there
is
is
the
ground
floor
element.
So
previously
there
was
two
bedrooms
shown
next
to
that
Pelican,
Crossing
and-
and
now
there's
only
the
one
and
as
part
of
the
additional
information
that's
been
submitted
to
this
application.
We've
received
a
nice
assessment
which
shows
for
noise
in
nearby
noise
impacts
can
be
mitigated
by
quite
a
high
spec
acoustic,
glazing
and
and
ventilation
system.
E
E
The
applicants
made
some
quite
significant
changes
in
line
with
our
comments,
in
particular,
moving
the
Dharma
windows
and
we
think
now
the
revised
design
represents
a
sympathetic
conversion
of
the
existing
building
where
it
was
previously.
We
had
concerns.
It
was
almost
looking
like
a
new
building.
E
So
what
happened
in
that
regard
and
they'll
also
have
the
benefit
of
bringing
a
long-term
vacant
Heritage
asset
back
into
use,
which
is,
is
significant
as
well
so
overall,
we
think
it
at
least
preserves
a
character
and
appearance
of
the
conservation
area,
and
it
also
won't
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
adjacent
listed
buildings.
E
In
terms
of
the
noise,
as
I
said,
they've
submitted
a
sorry
I'll
just
add
on
terms
of
the
design
that
conservation
office
is
now
happy
where
she
was
previously
objecting
on
the
on
the
previous
scheme.
So
those
plans
have
been
considered,
and
you
know
both
myself
and
the
conservation
officer
support
the
revised
design.
So
in
terms
of
the
noise,
the
submit
a
noise
assessment
which
showed
a
high
spec
acoustic,
glazing
and
mechanical
ventilation
system,
which
would
provide
adequate
mitigation
for
the
nearby
noise
sources.
E
So
we
upon
some
relevant
conditions
which
will
check
that
post
completion
at
the
start,
but
the
environmental
health
officer,
who
was
also
object
in
last
time,
is
now
happy
with
revised
proposals.
So
so,
overall
I
think
the
applicants
have
worked
hard
to
get
us
this
additional
information
in
line
with
the
comments
we
previously
gave
them
and
the
guidance-
and
you
know,
building
this,
bringing
this
building
back
into
use
is
obviously
a
significant
benefit
and
it'll
also
add
to
the
vibrancy
of
the
Town
Center
as
well.
E
So
now
we're
recommending
it
for
approval,
subject
to
the
conditions
outlined
at
the
start
of
the
report.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
Stephen
before
I
go
on
to
questions
from
members.
Councilman
Pryor
was
oh.
It's
here
welcome
very
welcome.
Q
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
think
this
seems
to
be
my
favorite
plans
panel
at
the
moment
to
be
coming
to
visit.
I
probably
won't
use
my
full
four
minutes
just
to
speak
about
some
of
my
experiences
as
a
local
Ward
member.
This
is
building
which
has
been
unused,
I
think
for
my
entire
time
as
a
counselor.
So
going
up
to
nine
years
now,
myself
and
the
other
counselors
had
a
look
around
it
around
the
inside.
Q
It's
really
clear
that
this
is
a
building
that
needs
a
lot
of
investment,
a
lot
of
work
and
has
been,
as
I
say,
an
eyesore
for
a
long
while
I
think
some
of
the
vandalism
had
been
mentioned.
The
graffiting
and
I
think
they've
been
smashed
windows
in
the
past,
so
we
as
local
board
members
are
very
keen
that
something
happens
with
this
building.
Q
We
think
these
plans
are
decent
ones,
they'll,
they'll,
work
well
in
the
area
and,
to
be
honest,
that's
all
I've
got
to
say
I'm
more
than
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
If
members
have
specific
queries,
but
just
really
to
say
that
we
as
Ward
members
are,
are
supportive
and
it'll
be
very
good
to
see
this
building
an
iconic
building
in
the
center
of
headingley
come
back
into
use.
B
M
B
To
John
at
this
stage,
but.
B
M
Thank
you
it
one
of
the
conditions
condition
10
is
occupancy
condition
apart,
Hotel
restriction
three
months
maximum
stay,
so
how
long
do
they
have
to
move
out
for
before?
They
can
then
have
another
three
months.
Please.
E
Just
try
and
get
you
the
full
word
in
for
that,
but
it's
a
standard
condition
put
on
a
similar
apart
Hotel
applications.
So
we
get
quite
a
few
in
in
the
city
center,
but
I
believe
it.
It
means
that
they
have
to
move
out
for
another
three
months
before
they
can
move
back
in.
But
do
you
want
me
to
just
get
some
clarity
and
come
back
on
on
that.
M
Months
because
we're
then
encouraging
it,
you
know
a
too
much
of
a
transient
environment
really
and
I'd
like
people
to
be
settled
in
a
home
rather
than
live
like
that.
Yeah.
E
Obviously
it's
coming
as
a
C1,
which
is
like
a
hotel
use
and
we
want
to
try
and
ensure
that
it
it
remains
as
a
hotel
room
use
rather
than
a
Mara
Rick
into
a
residential,
because
then
we'd
need
the
sill
payments.
The
the
larger
room,
sizes
and
and
other
aspects
like
that
so
yeah.
The
word
in
the
back
condition
does
prevent
you
from
bypassing
it
by
just
moving
out
for
a
day
and
coming
back
in.
M
I
I
was
obviously
on
on
panel
when
this
came
forward.
The
first
time
and
I'm
really
pleased
that
the
applicants
have
taken
our
concerns
into
consideration
and
have
dealt
with
them
so
so
so
nicely
really.
Foreign.
B
K
Yeah,
just
a
pirate.
What
councilor
Smith
has
just
said
it's
great.
This
is
a
really
great
part
of
of
this
role
is
that
it
was
deferred.
We
had
concerns
and
they've
come
back
and
rectified
and
I
think
it's
more
in
keeping
with
the
area
and
it's
more
sympathetic
as
it
should
be
so
yeah
Walden's,
African.
G
Yeah
just
like
to
say,
I'd
like
to
move
this.
G
I'd
like
to
move
this
anyway,
so
we
go
straight
to
the
vote
and
just
to
say
well
done
to
the
Developers
for
listening
to
us
and
moving
the
bedroom
like
I
asked,
even
though
it's
only
one.
B
D
J
C
B
Okay,
we
we
have
to
get
this
right
do
illegally,
but
it's
almost
unanimous
then
well,
there
is
Humanity
unanimous,
but
in
a
false
sense
it's
one
I've
sentient.
Isn't
it
okay?
Thank
you
for
that
and
can
I
thank
officers
for
bringing
back
a
much
improved
application.
I
did
live
in
headingley
and
I
did
use
it
when
I
was
a
community
center,
when
my
ex-wife
was
a
counselor
in
that
area,
so
I'm
very
familiar
with
it
and
I'm
really
pleased
that
we've
got
a
use.
B
C
Thank
you
chair.
It's
reporting
in
here
that
it
appears
that
I
made
an
objection.
I
actually
made
some
comments
in
regard
to
this
application
before
it
came
to
panel
I
am,
however,
more
than
happy
to
listen
to
what
officers
say
and
read.
The
report
and
I
I'm
still
approaching
this
with
an
open
mind.
D
R
The
application
before
members
seeks
planning
permission
for
the
demolition
of
a
stable
block,
an
erection
of
a
one
one,
three
bedroom
dwelling.
The
application
is
brought
to
plants
panel
at
the
request
of
councilor
Colin
Campbell
for
the
following
reasons.
This
is,
to
all
intents
and
purposes,
and
a
new
build
within
the
green
belt,
such
as
contrary
to
local
and
National
policy.
The
development
garden
and
car
parking
would
be
detrimental
to
the
openness
of
the
green
belt.
R
R
Back
one,
but
that's
so
that
the
site
is
located
so
equidistant
between
guys
are
unit
and
Holly
sort
of
two
two
kilometers
from
each
of
those
those
settlements
within
the
green
belt.
R
Setting
off
the
leads
the
immediate
surroundings
is,
is
a
group
comprised
of
the
grouping
of
loose
grouping
of
Residential,
Properties
farmsteads
question
uses
and,
and
then
you'll
see
that
there's
the
Hotel,
the
seven
hotels
into
the
North-
and
this
is
a
characteristic
of
this
part
of
of
of
the
the
green
belt
to
the
meat
itself
of
the
site.
There's
a
a
member
saw
on
site
this
morning,
there's
a
a
new
dwelling
which
has
been
built
replacing
a
an
existing
well
existing.
R
R
So
moving
on
to
the
photographs,
this
is
the
photograph
of
the
site
from
the
south
is,
as
you
can
see,
it's
a
the
stable
block.
Stable
blocks
are
deemed
to
be
previously
developed
land
within
within
the
mpps
and
and
therefore
that's
why
it's
come
through
with
him
as
a
her
recommendation
for
approval,
because
it's
because
it
in
principle
the
site
can
be
redevelops,
the
the
Caravan
is
no
longer
on
the
site.
R
This
is
a
view
from
from
the
Norfolk,
in
that
you
can
see
that
the
the
large
statement
dot
render
State
a
stable
block
there
quite
prominent
within
within
the
within
the
landscape.
R
From
the
north,
you
can
see
the
the
track
to
the
north
of
the
site
view
from
within
the
site.
You
can
see
that
the
usual
stable
setup
with
the
with
the
Stalls
and
small
area
of
hard
standing
to
to
the
front
of
the
the
Stables
A
View
from
the
south.
Looking
at
looking
looking
North,
you
can
see
this
stable,
stable,
lock
there,
with
with
the
small
agricultural
Timber
building
to
the
rear
and
again
you
can.
R
You
can
see
the
the
newly
constructed
two-story
property
at
the
rear
or
new,
extended
two-part
story
property
at
the
rear
there,
and
that's
just
a
photograph
of
that
property.
A
View
to
the
South.
You
see,
it's
got
clear,
open
views.
You
know
across
the
landscape
to
the
South
and
again
A
View
from
the
south.
Looking
up,
you
can
see
the
grouping
of
a
small
grouping
of
buildings.
R
This
is
the
house,
the
South
which
are
referred
to
in
the
opening
slide
on
the
left.
You
can
see
that
that
was
a
that
was
the
building
which
was
there
prior
to
approval
being
granted
an
appeal
for
its
replacement.
You
can
see
it's
been
replaced
with
a
very
similar
building
with
a
yes
slightly
increase
in
height,
but
the
the
form
is
is
replacing
the
existing
building
with
something
of
a
similar,
similar
scale.
R
R
A
a
small
porch
entrance
area
to
to
to
the
side,
show
the
floor
plans
next
as
you
as
you
can
see
that
there's
a
small
entrance
porch
main
living
area,
which
is
within
the
the
Gable
projection,
and
then
the
the
three
bedrooms
within
the
little
within
the
main
body
of
the
building,
we're
all
with
large
cell
facing
south
facing
windows.
R
Access
is
off
or
made
more
Lane,
and
you
can
see
that
and
it's
usually
the
existing
access
off
my
way
onto
the
site.
With
a
gravel
driveway
you
can
see.
You
can
see
that
the
proposal
is
to
have
the
formal
Garden
area
to
the
meat
itself
of
the
of
the
property
and
with
with
some
transition,
Meadow
planting
sort
of
within
the
field
to
help
assimilate
it
within
in
the
green
belts
and
soften
it.
Some
you
know,
appearance
this
slide.
It
shows
a
comparison
with
the
footprint
of
these.
R
What's
on
site.
At
the
moment
we
watch
proposed,
as
you
can
see,
it's
it's
it's.
R
It's
largely
in
the
same,
the
same
same
location
as
existing
stables
and
the
the
footprint
has
been
tightened
up
slightly,
so
it's
a
sort
of
Slimmer
slightly
narrower
building
with
the,
as
you
can
see
that
there's
a
couple
of
projections
which
will
go
go
beyond
the
the
footprint
of
the
of
the
existing
Stables,
and
this
is
just
a
comparison
to
show
the
the
different
scales
of
of
the
of
what's
there
and
then
we
watch
proposed,
as
you
can
see,
the
the
the
exist.
R
The
proposed
dwelling
does
increase
the
highs
of
the
what's
on
on
site,
that's
mainly
because
of
the
pitch
of
the
roof,
and
as
you
you
can
see
that
the
the
the
the
the
extra
volume
of
work
to
height
is
is
within
the
within
the
roof.
So
so,
let's
just
stick
in
there.
I
thought
it
would
be
it's
useful
just
to
compare
what
was
originally
submitted
and
what
what
what
has
been
negotiated
as
part
of
the
application.
R
Originally,
a
simple
sort
of
block
building,
rendering
Stone
property
was
proposed,
which
sort
of
more
mimics
what
was
on
size
at
the
moment,
but
officers
felt
this.
A
better
approach
would
be
to
try
and
break
it
up
at
a
level
of
interest
there.
R
Other
Gable
elements
and
the
side
element
there
and
and
a
narrower
Slimmer
building,
but
with
a
steep
bits,
roof
felt
that
that
sort
of
responded
better
in
design
to
to
the
locality
I
think
this.
These
these
show
it
in
in
context.
This
is
a
view
from
more
Lane.
Looking
up
to
the
side
elevation,
you
can
see
the
entrance
hall
there.
So
it's
it's
it's
it's.
R
It's
a
stone
stone,
very
traditional
stone,
stone
and
slate
slate
building
with
large
windows
to
the
South,
and
it's
just
sticking
a
little
bit
there
and
the
view
across
across
the
field
to
solve.
You
can
see
it,
how
it
sits
next
to
the
existing
agricultural
building
on
the
site
there
and
sits
within
the
within
the
the
landscape.
R
R
So
in
conclusions,
as
I
mentioned
within
the
within
the
presentation
that
was
also
Redevelopment
of
a
previously
developed
site
within
the
green
belt,
and
therefore
the
development
is,
is
acceptable
in
principle.
However,
in
way
of
the
planning
balance
of
the
prepared,
those
members
should
consider
whether
the
benefits
of
the
development
which,
namely
the
creation
of
good
quality,
well-designed
a
modest
dwelling
with
the
resulting
improvements
to
the
character
and
appearance
of
the
landscape
from
the
removal
of
the
The
Stables
outweigh
any
concerns.
R
Regarding
the
small
increase
in
the
scale
of
the
development
and
the
location
of
the
the
size
away
from
the
main
urban
area,
the
application
is
recommended
for
approval.
Okay,
back
to
you,.
B
Thank
you
Lawrence.
There
are
no
registered
objectives,
so
we
can
move
straight
on
to
questions
questions
from
members
John.
Please.
I
Thank
you,
chair.
Have
these
developers
said
anything
about
using
renewable
energy
because
bear
in
mind
that
nice
south
facing
roof
and
just
suits
all
the
panels,
and
that,
along
with
that
using
air
size,
Heat
The,
Source.
R
People
has
been
has
been
discussed
and
there's
no
gas
at
all
yeah
and
we
can
yeah.
We
can
explore
that
and
then
we've
looked
on
all
the
all
the
schemes
where
we've
we've
looked
at
our
sources,
pumps,
so
yeah,
that's,
certainly
something
we
haven't
discussed
thanks.
R
G
Please
Minister
John
hi
Waits.
It
says
that
the
eggs
existing
access
from
the
mouth
from
Malin
onto
Carlton
Nick
is
substantial
and
therefore
Improvement
should
be
made.
Is
it
the
developers
to
make
the
Improvement,
or
are
you
saying,
highways
to
make
an
improve.
D
F
The
improvements
relate
to
the
fact
that
the
Belmont
at
the
moment
is
built
from
granular
materials.
What
we've
asked
is
that
they
surface
it
with
with
bound
materials
so
that
water
and
other
materials
can
be
dealt
with
without
being
washed
onto
the
highway
or
brought
on
to
that
have
they
agreed
to
that,
then.
Yes,
in
principle,.
D
G
My
next
one
it's
it
says
that
on
page
38,
number
10.-
that
is
the
new
access
from
the
dwelling,
goes
onto
a
third
party
land.
Is
that
so.
D
R
Yeah,
as
originally
submitted
there
was
the
access
was
to
the
not
to
the
north
of
the
site.
The
track
at
the
rear
is
not
in
the
the
applicant's
ownership
and
that's
where
that
was
so.
That's
why
the
access
is
now
across
the
field
where
we
stood
this
morning,
yeah
the
modified
there.
So
so
that's
all
within
the
the
client's
ownership
I
know
the
high
side.
There,
applicants.
G
Okay,
so,
where
you
said
that's
going
to
be
the
entrance.
Okay
also,
you
know
I
beside
there's
that
shed
is
that
going
to
be
affected
when
they're
doing
the
building
or
are
they
going
to
link
into
it?.
R
That
is,
that's,
you
know
the
applicant's
ownership,
but
that's
going
to
be
retained
that
that's
part
of
the
small
world
in
the
the
barn,
so
it
is
going
to
be
retained.
H
It's
just
I
mean
I,
think
the
development
looks
really
well,
but
just
one
thing
that
perhaps
concerns
me
slightly:
it's
a
stable.
Currently,
isn't
it
and
there's
lots
of
horses
on
the
fields?
H
R
A
new
Sable
would
require
a
punting
permission,
so
I
I
mean
they
haven't
indicated
that
that's.
What's
that
they're
going
to
do
but
I
suppose
it's
one
for
one
for
the
applicant,
but
we
couldn't
resist
the
application
on
the
loss
of
these
tables
really
and
if
they
do
need
additional,
stable
accommodation.
That's
something
we'd
have
to
look
look
at
as
part
of
another
application.
D
M
M
So,
and
will
that
incursion
then
lead
to
another
one
of
these
and
are
we
getting
a
little
Hamlet
given
that
the
the
property
next
door
is
already
extending
that's
quite
a
number
of
dwellings
that
will
now
be
upper
very
narrow
and
unmade
Lane,
which
is
a
quite
a
concern
for
services,
as
well
as
everything
else,
emergency
vehicles
and
and
everything
else
also
I'd
like
to
have
some
clarity
on
paragraph
30,
please,
which
is
Page
41.,
that
states
quite
clearly
that
the
development
proposed
does
not
meet
the
specific
circumstances.
M
Obviously,
we
need
to
resist
building
in
Greenbelt,
it's
there
for
a
reason,
and
it's
there
for
everybody's
enjoyment
and
if
we
continue
to
just
chip
away
a
little
house
here
or
a
little,
you
know,
building
there,
it
will
soon
become
used
up
so
I'd,
like
some
clarification
on
that
particular
paragraph.
Please
thank
you.
R
Drawings
within
the
green
belt
yeah-
and
there
was
there-
is
the
criteria
that
we
should
be
resisting:
isolate,
isolated
dwellings,
that's
across
that's
not
just
within
the
green
belt,
that's
across
all
Countryside,
so
where,
where,
where
dwellings
are
impractical,
have
created
a
significant
amount
of
infrastructure
to
achieve
them
that
that's
where
we
should
be
looking
to
looking
to
resist
them
in
terms
of
the
criteria?
There
is
a
criteria
where
we
you
can
set
aside
that,
where
the
the
as
Welling
is
of
exceptional
quality.
R
Residents
are
going
to
be
reliant
on
on
a
vehicle,
but
it's
not
so
it's
not
so
isolated
that
it's
impractical
or
the
reason
why
not
as
I
say
to
say
it
is
it's
in
a
grouping
of
existing
dwellings
which
are
which
are
serviced
by
The
Refuge
vehicle.
So
it's
not
so.
R
Yes,
it's
not
so
impractical,
but
that
we
would
look
to
resist
it
on
those
on
those
grounds
and
I.
I
say
the
the
properties
of
the
rear
is
not
a
new
property;
it
is
an
extended
property,
so
this
that
so
we
we're
increasing
by
one.
C
C
It's
at
least
a
two
kilometer
walk
to
any
service
whatsoever,
be
that
a
shop
or
a
school
or
a
bus
stop,
and
that
two
kilometers
is
not
on
what
I
suppose
you
describe
as
surface
pavement,
it's
across
country.
So
if
you
find
it,
you
can't
physically
walk
to
to
otley,
for
example,
from
there
without
walking
down
the
middle
of
a
road.
Even
if
you
don't
cross
the
countryside.
The
same
is
true
about
Carlton
Lane,
there's
no
pavement
on
College
Lane,
so
I
I'm
slightly
bemused
by
the
idea
that
it's
not
isolated.
C
R
R
There's
provision
there
for
for
the
redevelopments
of
previous
development
in
this
context,
where
it
isn't
isolated
from
other
properties
or
other
properties,
there
there's
a
there's:
the
Redevelopment
of
the
site,
200
yards
away,
exactly
from
very
similar
circumstances,
which
which
inspectorate
considered
and
felt
on
balance
that
it's
it
is
accessible.
So
I
think
we
would
acknowledge
that
this.
There
is
a
Reliance
on
on
the
car
there
to
get
to
to.
R
O
Can
I
just
add
that
there's
no
statutory
Definition
of
isolated,
so
law,
Justice
Lynn
bomb,
has
gone
through
and
there's
a
case
law
around
this.
Where
there's
been
assessment
of
what's
isolated
and
just
to
sort
of
echo
what
has
been
said,
it
doesn't
need
to
be
a
checklist
almost,
but
there
does
need
to
be
regarded
as
councilor
Campbell
has
said
it's
whether
or
not
it's
in
a
settled
location
or
boundary.
O
Proximity
to
other
dwellings,
which
Lawrence
has
already
mentioned:
proximity
to
local
services
and
Facilities
access
to
public
services
and
transport,
and
then
the
physical
and
visual
separation
to
the
to
the
settlement
as
well.
But
it
is
a
matter
of
planning
judgment
and
the
facts
of
the
case
are
all
individual
and
because
there
isn't
a
statutory
definition.
That's
for
you,
as
decision
makers,
to
balance.
B
That's
a
very
useful
explanation:
I
I,
probably
question
to
John.
Actually
when
we
were
talking
about
the
access
to
to
the
proposed
new,
develop
development,
I'm
very
conscious
that
we
couldn't
take
the
bus
up
there,
you
know
because
they
were
concerned
about
reversing
or
bringing
back
the
it's
been
said
that
it's
already
serviced
by
our
our
bin
wagons.
You
know,
is
there
a
proper
provision
for
them
to
turn
and
to
get
up
there?
The
road
was
pretty
unsuitable.
B
R
I,
don't
know
how
the
Refuge
Vehicles
Services
it
is
on
the
refuse
route
and
there's
there's
a
question
business
and
properties
further
up
there.
So
there
is,
there
is
area
to
turn
up
ahead
there,
but
it
isn't
as
it
isn't,
that
convenient
for
large
Vehicles,
as
we
said,
as
we
obviously
saw
on
site,
but
for
a
single
modest
dwelling,
I
felt
that
it's
it's
it's
it's
it's
it's
reasonable
and
obviously
there's
an
existing
stable
use
on
the
side
which
which
generates
vehicles
of
Assassin's
tires.
F
Yeah
with
regards
to
certainly
at
the
property
there,
there
is
space
within
the
cartilage
of
the
property
for
the
the
cars
and
the
smaller
vehicles
to
turn
around
within
within
their
own
space
anyway,
yeah
but
yeah
large
service
vehicles
are
well.
They
they
do
it
already.
There's
the
space
further
on
the
road
within
the
cartilage
of
the
other
properties,
which
I
presume
they
use
to
turn
around
up.
There.
D
D
I
You
it's
on
this
small
Lane
again,
I've
just
done
a
quick.
Let
me
take
a
quick
check
and
it
is
a
private
road.
I
R
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
I'm,
clear
on
the
exact
ownership.
I
know
that
that
it
is
a
bridal
way,
so
they
do
need
to
have
the
legal
permission
to
to
to
use
that
which
they
have
confirmed
that
they
do
have.
You
know
legal
right
to
to
use
it
for,
for
the
dwelling
I
don't
know
if
you've
got
any
comments
on
the
private
ownership,
but
I
don't
know.
B
I'm,
like
Lawrence,
there's
no
objectives
here,
so
we
could
bring
forward
the
applicant
to
answer
that
question
if
they
were
willing
to
do
so.
Is
there
anybody
nobody?
Well,
there
was
an
idea.
B
It's
definitely
be
useful
to
know
these
things.
Wouldn't
you
know
that
there
is
an
issue.
I
was
very
conscious
that
it
was
quite
Steep
Hill
up
there
and
we
had
the
struggle
to
the
top,
and
the
reason
was
that
bus
driver
and
it
was
only
small
bus.
It
wasn't
a
major
bus
about
the
same
size
of
one
of
our
Bean
wagons
really
and
they
felt
they
might
have
a
problem.
Turning
so
I
mean
it's
really
interested
to
to
to
know
the
answer
to
that.
One.
D
I
I
That,
if
the
owners
came
forward
and
asked
for
it
to
become
adopted,
would
we
be?
Would
we
take
that
on
as
an
adopted
drug.
F
Yeah
I
don't
envisage
a
time
when
that
would
be,
it
would
be
accepted
for
adoption.
There's
lots
of
issues.
Why
why
it
would
be
substandard
in
that
regard,
so
we
would.
We
wouldn't
take
it
on.
O
F
O
P
It
was
a
chair
just
just
very
briefly,
following
or
finishing
off
the
the
question
that
was
asked
by
councilor
gabani
about
ownership.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
from
a
highways
perspective,
the
access
is
acceptable
for
the
number
of
properties
it's
about
potentially
about
to
serve,
but
in
terms
of
the
ownership.
Ultimately,
the
applicant
will
have
to
make
sure
that
it
has
sufficient
rights
to
use
it.
So
it's
up
to
them
to
do
it
with
it.
In
the
end.
B
J
Yeah
thanks
yeah
I
think,
given
the
interesting
discussion,
we've
had
so
far,
I'm
perfectly
content
with
the
officer
recommendations,
I
just
hope.
The
applicant
looking
at
that
lovely
south
facing
glazing,
spends
a
lot
of
money
on
that
South,
failing
glazing
for
good,
sound
and
thermal
performance
and
probably
go
above
and
beyond
BS.
J
C
Well,
I
think
that's
the
the
key
isn't
it
is
is
the
fact
that
it's
a
green
belt
location
and
there
is
no
dispute
that
it's
a
green
belt
location
and
by
default,
any
development
within
the
green
belt
and
I've
listened
to
everything.
Lawrence
has
said
by
default.
Any
any
development
within
the
green
belt
is
harmful.
It
says
that
in
the
in
the
act,
and
so
this
will
be
harmful
to
the
green
belt
and
I
think
our
role
is
to
say
in
effect.
C
Are
there
special
circumstances,
which
would
mean
that
we
could
set
aside
that
harm
in
our
deliberations
and
come
to
the
conclusion
that
a
nice
house
at
that
location
is
something
we
would
be
happy
with
this?
This,
to
all
intents
and
purposes,
is
a
new
build
I
know
that
there's
currently
a
stable
there,
but
as
you've
seen,
the
revised
plans
and
drawings
create
a
substantially
larger
building.
C
C
As
you
say,
the
access
runs
substandard.
But
if
you
know
that's
down
to
you,
if
you're,
if
you
want
to
buy
the
house
or
you
want
to
live
in
the
house,
then
you
have
to
accept
that.
In
my
in
my
view,
we
haven't
had
a
valid
reason.
In
my
opinion,
to
set
aside
Greenbelt
policy,
you
know,
normally
you
would
a
developer
would
come
along
and
say:
well,
I
want
to
do
it
for
X,
Y
and
Z.
This
is
just
simply
I.
C
Think
I
want
to
do
it
because
I
think
I
can
and
Lawrence
I
know.
I,
know,
I
disagree
with
you
slightly
and
it,
and
that
design
is
of
course,
a
matter
of
opinion
that
I
do
disagree
with
the
on
design.
Yes,
it's
much
better
than
the
original
one,
but
then
it
they'd
have
to
try
really
hard
to
get
worse
than
the
original
one.
C
But
this
is
what
they've
done
is
increased
the
size
increase.
So
the
and
change
some
of
the
dimensions,
but
it's
still
not,
in
my
opinion,
a
particularly
good
design.
C
It's
not
in
a
sustainable
location,
let's
be
honest
about
that.
It
really
isn't,
and
you
know
we
we
can
argue
that
semantics
of
whether
it's
isolated
or
not
but
I,
think
if
you
were
up
there
without
a
car,
it's
pretty
isolated
because
you
can't
get
anywhere
and
it
seems
to
me
that
I
appreciate
what
you
say
about
the
the
other
conversion
that
we
talked
about,
which
is
actually
on
counter
the
land
itself
rather
than
on
now.
C
C
Everybody
said,
but
I
have
not
been
convinced
by
the
argument
that
we
should
set
aside
Greenbelt
policy
to
allow
a
new
build
in
this
location,
and
I
would
remind
members
that
actually,
there
was
a
an
application
of
last
year
for
a
another
house,
slightly
higher
up
Mile
Lane,
which
the
council
refused
and
as
I
say,
I
I,
don't
think
I
could
support
the
officer's
recommendation
on
this.
One.
I
Thank
you
just
following
on
from
what
councilor
Campbell's
just
said,
paragraph
28
on
page
41.
I
covers
they're,
doing
a
rebuild
on
that
site
and
I
think
is
quite
clear
that
it
wouldn't
have
agreed
to
any
greater
impact
on
the
openness
of
the
green
belt
than
the
existing
development.
There
is
a
permanent
building
there
at
the
moment
it
is
being
replaced
by
another
permanent
structure,
which
I
think
is
a
significant
Improvement
on.
What's
currently
there
so
I
wouldn't
have
any
any
problem
on
that.
I
do
agree
with
councilor
Smith
about
the
piggybacking.
I
You
know
if
they
build
another
stable
Block
in
eight
months
time
and
then
six
eight
months
further
on
come
on
and
say:
can
we
build
another
house
down
here
that
I
would
have
a
problem
with,
but
that's
for
future
times.
If
it
comes
about
I
think
with
what
they're
doing
at
the
moment,
the
building
it
out
of
Stone
slate
roof,
it
looks
good.
It
looks
as
though
it
belongs
in
the
area,
so
I
would
have
no
problems
in
supporting
this
chair.
L
And
yeah
I
just
want
to
to
reiterate
councilor
gavani's
comments.
I
mean
I
think
if
it
was.
If
there
was
nothing
there
at
the
moment,
then
yes,
we'd
have
an
issue.
We'd,
be
you
know,
building
from
scratching
the
green
belt
absolutely,
but
we've
already
got
stable
block
and
an
office.
You
know
an
office
building
there
and
we're
replacing
existing
buildings.
If,
if
there
was
nothing
there,
then
yes
I
would
have
an
I
absolutely
would
have
an
issue
with
it.
But
I
think
you
know:
we've
already
got
buildings
there
and
we're
replacing
them.
L
So
I
have
no
no
issue
with
that
and
and
and
second
Council
walshaw's
proposal.
B
M
So
Chad
it's
really
for
it's
for
officers
and
I,
don't
know
the
answer.
Is
there
any
way
of
conditioning
that
there
is
no
further
building
on
the
site?
Please.
P
B
It's
been
moved
by
cousin
walshall.
Now
we
accept
officer
recommendation
and
second
by
at
Jules
all
those
in
favor.
Please
show.
B
The
record
will
never
be
beat.
It
was
nine
minutes
that's
some
years
ago
and
there
was
something
like
120
applications
on,
but
don't
even
ask
me
how
we
got
to
that
position.
It
wasn't
me
who
chair
that
I
can
tell
you
okay
moving
on
then
toot
thanks
a
Lotus
when
you're
ready.
R
Okay,
so
this
application
has
been
brought
to
to
members
as
a
position
statement.
The
application
is
brought
to
funds
panel
to
inform
and
seek
members
views
on
the
proposal
for
the
change
of
view.
So
the
grade
two
listed
former
Burley
Library
building
and
the
erection
of
a
six-story
extension
to
create
a
78
bed,
space,
co-living
and
co-working
hub
to
provide
some
background
on
co-lib
in
the
concept,
is
an
emerging
form
of
tenure
within
the
housing
market.
And,
although
there's
some
operational
schemes
in
London,
this
is
still
new
to
most
course.
R
Cities,
including
Leeds
co-living,
is
targeted
at
the
recent
graduate
Market
consultancy
type
workers
who
only
need
to
be
in
a
particular
location
for
a
number
of
months.
A
few
months,
key
workers
who
work
in
City,
centers
and
also
recent
income
is
the
city
cities
who
don't
necessarily
want
to
rent
on
their
own
or
know
anyone
to
health
share
with.
R
Although
there
are
a
range
of
types
of
co-living
models,
there
are
some
general
characteristics.
These
are
the
schemes
of
purpose-built,
shared
living,
accommodation,
residents
of
a
private
room
or
Studio
within
the
wider
development,
which
includes
a
range
of
shares
facilities.
Residents
rely
on
or
are
actively
encouraged
to
share
to
use
shared
facilities
as
part
of
the
overall
management
and
shared
living
approach.
R
R
The
application
was
submitted
in
October
2021,
at
which
point
the
houses
in
multiple
occupation,
purpose-built
student,
accommodation
and
co-living
Immunity
standards,
dress
and
draft
SPD
was
progressing,
and
the
scheme
is
designed
to
reflect
this
guidance.
However,
following
discussions
at
development
plans,
members
resolved
and
co-living
the
co-living
section
of
the
SBD
would
remove
from
the
documents
and
therefore
has
has
no
weights
just
to
update
on
the
history
of
the
site.
Buying
permission
was
granted
in
2019
for
the
Redevelopment
of
Burley
library
for
co-workers.
R
That's
the
co-working
space
and
a
six-story
extension
to
create
60,
see
through
residential
Apartments.
The
current
application
is
predominantly
the
same
proposal
for
the
library
and
design
scale
of
extension,
with
with
the
amendment
being
the
accommodation
changing
from
the
C3
dwellings
to
cover
living
units.
Okay,
and
with
that
I'll
move
on
to
some
slides
foreign.
R
Early
library
is
located
in
the
center
there
between
the
two
larger
large
student
accommodation,
accommodations
at
the
classworks
to
the
north
four
or
five
story,
building
and
embankment
on
the
corner
to
me
itself,
so
you
can
see,
there's
Burley,
Park
and
very
large
Parker
and
sort
of
located
either
side
of
the
at
the
sites
and
The
Wider
area
is
predominantly
residential,
with
a
mix
of
commercial
and
and
Retail
this
view
of
the
science
when
we
saw
on
site
earlier
this.
R
This
is
the
grade
two
listed
former
Billy
Library
building
and
you
can
see
it's
it's
located
between
the
the
larger
classworks
and
and
embankment
buildings,
and
this
is
just
a
view
from
the
other
way
you
can.
You
can
see
you
can
see
the
different
scales
of
development
as
you
go
up.
R
Cardigan
Road
there
with
the
listed
library
located
between
the
two,
the
two
newer
buildings,
and
so
this
is
what
what
what's
proposed
and
as
I
say
this
is
this
is
what
was
granted
permission
in
terms
of
the
built
form
previously,
so
the
the
listed
libraries
is
retained
and
refurbished.
R
R
Some
some
3DS
visual
skill
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
more
context.
You
see
the
3D
visual
from
us
from
this
street
there
with
the
the
large
extension
set
set
to
the
rear
of
the
of
the
library
building
and
and
to
the
rear,
it's
six
story
building
with
with
undercut
under
craft
parking.
R
So
moving
on
this
since,
since
the
report
was
finished,
the
the
the
parking
Arrangements
have
changed,
I've
been
updated
and
I'll
I'll
just
explain
that
to
you.
So
the
the
access
as
a
member
is
existing
access
off
off,
cardigan,
Road
and
and
there'll
be
19
parking
spaces
in
the
shared
parking
area
and
they'll
be
shared
between
the
Glassworks
and
and
and
the
the
proposed
development
at
ground
floor.
R
The
the
library
the
library
building
is
is
to
be
to
be
converted
into
a
co-working
space
for
both
residents
and
and
general
public
and-
and
that's
remains
a
lot
larger
unaltered
internally,
also
we're
on
the
ground
floor
of
this
seven
duplex
units,
partly
within
the
Library
building,
partly
within
the
rear
extension
and
a
small
area
of
immune
outdoor
immunity
space
that
this
is
additional
parking.
This
is
actually
accessed
Mrs
basement
parking.
R
This
is
actually
actually
access
access
through
the
the
parking
area,
the
adjacent
embankment
building
and
that's
a
18
additional
car
parking
spaces.
Underneath
the
the
the
extension
to
the
to
the
library.
R
Just
to
go
on
to
the
the
layout
of
the
of
the
developments
this,
this
is
an
indicator.
Well,
not
indicative.
This
is
the
first
floor
layout
as
you
can
see,
there's
15
of
the
co1
living
units
within
within
the
floor.
These
are
all
all
30
square
meters,
they're
all
30
30
square
meters
and
throughout
the
throughout
throughout
the
building
and
the
pink
there
that
shows
the
the
communal
shared
living
space
and
Terrace
area
projected
out
there
each
floor
has
a
communal,
Terrace
balcony
area.
R
This
shows
just
a
little
bit
more
detail
of
what
the
communal
spaces
are
so
kitchen
kitchen
sitting
areas
at
the
outlaw
space
and
and
socializing
areas
within
that
and
a
3D
visualists,
some
of
them
of
the
of
the
co
of
the
shared
spaces,
a
a
specific
two
floors,
so
there's
access
between
the
two
floors.
So
this
is
part
double
height
space,
just
to
improve
sort
of
permanent
multi
between
between
the
social
spaces.
R
Just
bear
with
me
yeah,
just
some
photographs
of
the
internals
of
the
library
building,
which,
as
I
say,
is,
is
going
to
be
converted
and
restored
as
part
of
the
development,
as
members
saw
earlier,
it's
still
in
reasonable
good
condition,
and
then
the
proposal
is
to
is
to
a
light
touch
just
flip
through
some
of
the
photography.
R
As
you
see
the
the
really
interesting
Corners
in
roof,
lanterns
parquet
floors
throughout
the
building
and
that's
just
another
photograph
of
what
is
a
splendor
building.
This
just
shows,
what's
proposed
for
the
the
library
building
as
I
say
that
the
the
main
the
body
of
the
library
is
is
going
to
be
restored.
The
tile
in
roof,
lanterns
are
going
to
be
restored
and
opened
up
or
or
Oak.
R
Work
is,
is
to
be
to
be
restored
and
that's
replaced,
and
that's
that
goes
to
the
externals
of
the
building
as
well.
It's
all
it's
going
to
be
fully
fully
restored
and,
as
members
saw
it
as
well,
the
Double
height
space
there
that
is
going
to
have
for
for
duplex
units
in
there.
R
Just
this,
the
the
the
application
has
has
developed
through
through
the
application
process
and
originally
was
submitted.
It
was
for
for
98
units
or
about
22
23
square
meters.
You
can
see,
on
the
left
hand,
side
here.
What
was
proposed
and
with
this
is.
This
is
a
comparison
of
the
third
floor
that
was
for
20
units
and
two,
what
they
call
Mega
kitchens
and
which
officers
couldn't
support
this
we
felt
like
you
know
it
was
it
was.
R
It
was
too
much
the
units
weren't
large
enough
and
the
communal
spaces,
where,
where,
frankly,
we're
we're
we're
we're
considered
to
be
poor.
So
in
terms
of
How
It's
developed,
the
units
now
have
dropped
by
20.
R
So
on
that
floor,
there's
it's
gone
from
20
to
to
15
the
the
unit
size
has
gone
from
22
23
square
meters
up
to
30,
and
these
the
living
accommodation
has
been
moved
for
the
front
of
the
building
to
to
take
advantage
of
the
you
know,
the
the
outdoor
space
and
just
a
a
sort
of
yeah
the
better
quality
spaces
are
now
on
the
front
of
the
building,
which
I
mean
our
offices
fulfilled
a
husband
yeah.
It
has
progressed
so
that's
so
in
conclusions.
The
proposal
to
read
about
the
size
is
co-living
combination.
R
It
is
a
New
Concept
for
housing
provision
within
the
within
the
leads,
and
it's
not
subject
to
any
specific
policy.
So,
in
the
absence
of
of
this
policy,
each
case
needs
to
be
considered
on
its
merits.
Members
are
asked
to
note
the
contents
of
the
reports
and
the
presentation
and
are
invited
to
provide
feedback
with
particular
focus
on
on
the
following
questions.
Do
members
support
the
principle
of
co-living
and
the
immunity
offered
by
the
development?
Do
members
support
the
approach
with
formal
housing
provision
for
this
clear
living
development?
B
We'll
get
back
to
those
questions
when
we've
had
a
discussion,
there
are
no
registered
objectives,
but
we
have.
We
have
some
applicants
here.
It
might
be
useful
if
they
come
forward
this
stage.
I've
got
Oliver
Corbett,
gallon
Oxley
and
Jordy
Campo
Bria.
B
Okay,
it's
how
you
record
it.
You've
got
four
minutes
to
come.
B
Okay,
if
you
welcome
any
good
afternoon
or
welcome,
but
I'll
I'll
now
invite
members
to
ask
questions
to
officers
and
yourselves.
So
when
you're,
when
a
question
is
directed
at
you,
please
be
available
to
answer
it.
Questions
from
members.
D
P
B
Okay,
we
we
saw
the
route
I've
had
conflict
in
their
opinions
from
two
offices,
but
that
seems
the
right
way
to
do
it.
Actually,
that's
that's
what
as
I
read
it
so
in
four
minutes
to
make
a
presentation
and
when
you,
when
you
speak,
please
introduce
yourself.
We
have
the
names
in
front
of
us,
but
for
members
benefit,
if
you
just
introduce
who
you
are
and
then
members
will
be
free
to
ask
questions
brilliant.
N
Thank
you,
chair
yep,
so
I'm
Oliver,
Corbett
I'm,
a
principal
planner
at
DPP
with
me,
I've
got
Darren
Oxley
to
my
left,
head
of
development
for
the
Park
Lane
group,
the
applicants
and
Jordy
Campo
Bria
from
yemi
Architects.
So
after
I've
done
my
speech,
they
can
answer
any
specific
questions
on
the
operation
of
the
building
or
the
design
and
the
architecture
yep
so
good
afternoon.
Members
and
thank
you
chair
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today,
I'd
like
to
thank
Lawrence
for
his
detailed
report
and
presentation.
N
We've
worked
closely
with
himself
and
officers
for
over
12
months
on
this
application,
which
we
hope
members
can
can
be
able
to
support.
We're
aware
that
members
of
City
plans
panel
in
particular,
have
been
presented
with
a
number
of
core
living
schemes
in
recent
years.
However,
we
understand
that
this
is
the
first
to
form
part
of
a
live
planning
application,
that's
actually
being
presented
to
members
for
for
consideration.
N
N
N
The
Park
Lane
group
Prides
itself
on
providing
high
level
of
service
and
quality
accommodation,
irrespective
of
the
secretary
in
which
it
operates
with
the
icon,
Inc
brand
being
a
pinnacle
of
purpose-built
student
accommodation
regarded
as
Seven,
Star,
Quality
and
ranking
as
number
one
student
accommodation
provider
in
the
cities
in
which
it
operates
voted
by
the
students
that
live
there.
This
is
echoed
in
their
rooms
apart
Hotel
operation,
with
the
brand
continuing
to
win
industry
Awards,
particularly
around
design
quality
and
the
level
of
service
that
they
offer.
N
The
Parkland
group
are
determined
to
take
this
level
of
service
and
quality
into
the
emerging
world
of
co-living
accommodation,
although
it's
yet
to
develop
in
Leeds.
The
city
is
keenly
suited
to
the
core
Living
Model,
as
this
type
of
living
Arrangement
is
seen
as
a
natural
progression
from
student
accommodation,
appealing
to
graduates
and
young
professionals.
N
Department
group
can
testify
to
this
with
constant
requests
from
students
who
stay
at
their
iconic
sites
to
stay
in
in
those
sites
after
graduating,
and
particularly
the
wanting
to
remain
in
Leeds
as
they
embark
on
their
professional
careers.
We
therefore
see
this
development
as
contributing
significantly
towards
graduate
retention
in
the
city.
N
Having
worked
closely
with
officers,
the
scheme
now
provides
a
minimum
private
unit
size
of
30
square
meters
compared
to
the
initial
submission
of
22
and
provide
shared
amenity
space
in
the
form
of
indoor
shared
spaces
and
outdoor
balconies,
with
each
Rockies
player
benefiting
from
8.4
square
meters
of
shared
space
per
person
compared
to
the
other
co-living
schemes
presented
in
Leeds.
Recently,
the
library
provides
significantly
more
private
space
and
shared
amenity
space
than
any
of
those
schemes
with
an
overall
38.4
square
meters
of
space
per
resident.
N
As
a
result
of
these
changes,
the
number
of
units
proposed
has
dropped
from
98
to
78.,
which
we
consider
to
be
a
worthwhile
change,
improving
the
standard
of
living
for
residents
whilst
further
encouraging
them
to
socialize
with
their
neighbors
and
promote
mental
well-being
due
to
the
constraints
of
the
site.
External
amenity
is
limited.
However,
the
design
aims
to
maximize
every
opportunity,
through
the
inclusion
of
balconies,
predominantly
around
the
shared
communal
areas,
with
all
occupiers
having
access
to
a
balcony.
N
In
terms
of
other
policy
issues,
the
site
is
very
constrained
due
to
its
size,
the
listed
Library
building
itself
and
the
railway
Viaduct
to
the
rear.
As
a
result,
it
cannot
deliver
the
full
parking
provision
typically
required,
nor
can
it
deliver
sufficient
open
space
on
site.
However,
the
applicant
is
committed
to
providing
funds
for
traffic
regulation
orders
on
adjacent
streets,
car
club
scheme
to
reduce
the
need
for
car
ownership
and
a
commuted
Zone
to
provide
open
space
improvements
elsewhere
in
the
area.
B
I
think
you
just
got
to
the
final
Builder,
but
I'm
sure
members
will
bring
out
some
issues
in
the
question.
Can
I
invite
members
to
ask
questions
now.
Please.
I
Yeah
I
don't
know
if
this
is
something
for
yourselves
or
actually
highways,
but
I'll
just
put
it
out
there.
If
that's
okay,
the
proposal
for
tros
for
neighborhood
parking,
how
far
and
wide
will
that
is
they
intended?
That
goes.
N
Yeah,
so
we've
still
got
as
it's
been
presented
as
a
position
statement.
We
have
still
got
conversations
to
have
with
highways,
I
think
a
recent
meeting.
We
were
on
the
way
to
getting
a
set
area
that
we're
looking
at,
but
that
is
going
to
be
determined
by
highways
officers
and
and
will
obviously
review
what
they
they
ask
us
to
do.
J
Thanks
yeah,
it
was
just
without
views,
have
been
helpful
and
you're
in
kind
of
full
flow.
After
four
minutes,
I
often
thought
in
a
pre-app
would
have
you
know,
there'd
be
a
longer
presentation.
Just
to
be
helpful.
Is
anything
else
you'd
want
to
add
from
what
you're
going
to
say.
That
might
be
quite
useful
for
members,
especially
because
there's
a
lack
of
a
presentation
as
well
chair-
and
this
is
the
first
time
myself
I've
seen
this
application
yeah
I'm.
Just
you
know.
N
Yeah
I
did
have
a
paragraph
left,
so
I
could
have
sped
up
a
bit
more
but
yeah.
It's
just
to
note
on
affordable
housing
provision.
We
did
have
a
lot
of
discussions
with
officers
on
whether
affordable
policy
was
applicable
as
it's.
It's
not
a
typical
residential
use,
but
the
applicant's
committed
to
provide
a
full
seven
percent
provision
Again
by
a
commuted
sum
so
I
think
I.
Think
that's
the
only
bit
left
for
me.
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
speak
on
the
actual
operation
of
what
we're
looking
at.
S
Yeah
so
I'm
Darren
Oxley,
head
of
development
for
the
Parkland
group
in
terms
of
operation,
we're
obviously
extremely
experienced
or
my
operational
colleagues
are
in
managing
residence.
S
We
see
this
as
a
natural
progression,
particularly
from
our
pbsa
brand,
and
we
just
also
see
it
as
bringing
that
building
back
into
life
and
we
we're
extremely
Keen
to
move
the
development
forward
and
to
bring
a
community
building
back
into
use
by
the
public
as
well
as
residents
of
the
building.
All
right.
G
My
question
is
regard
you're
going
to
have
the
members
of
the
public
access
to
the
building,
so
why
so
many
duplex
plots
instead
of
ordinary
Flats.
G
You
know
because
I
hear
what
you're
saying
that
it's
students
when
they
graduate
to
move
into
a
shared
accommodation
but
they're
living
there,
it's
they're
going
to
be
their
home.
Why
isn't
it
Flats?
So
when
you
leave
student
accommodation,
you
want
your
own
flat
rather
than
a
shared
accommodation.
Did
you
consider
it's
been
a
Flats
instead,
because
we
are
short
of
to
to
bedrooms
and
three
bedrooms.
Did
you
ever
consider
that?
Because
it
is
in
a
residential
area
where
we've
already
got
lots
of
students,
accommodation.
S
No,
no
it's
much
wider.
We
obviously
do
get
requests
from
residents
in
our
existing
pbsa
schemes,
where
they're
looking
to
move
into
employment
post
graduation
and
ask
to
stay
in
in
their
existing
accommodation,
which
obviously
is
not
permissible.
S
So
we
know
there
is
a
demand
when
not
a
traditional
residential
developer
or
operator.
I.
Think
we
see
our
skill
set
in
managing
people
within
those
and
offering
more
than
just
a
solitary
apartment
in
a
building
which
can
be
quite
faceless
and
we've
seen
through
the
kind
of
extent
of
amenity
that
members
saw
who
visited
the
Glassworks
today,
encouraging
people
to
socialize
with
their
their
neighbors
and
with
the
good,
the
Greater
Community
in
the
in
the
space
at
ground
floor.
S
The
the
reason
for
allowing
Public
Access
is
to
encourage
engagement
with
people,
bring
a
former
public
building
back
into
for
the
public,
and
there
is
a
demand
you
know.
People
are
in
this
kind
of
changing
World
working
from
home,
don't
always
want
to
kind
of
work
at
a
dining
table
in
their
kitchen,
but
also
don't
have
an
office
to
visit.
S
N
If
I
just
come
back
on
on
that
point
as
well,
the
the
ground
floor
area
is
being
offered
to
the
public
and
residents
the
the
residents
in
the
duplexes
do
have
their
own
kitchen
space
and
shared
amenity
as
well.
So
they're
not
only
sharing
that
that
space
with
with
the
public
as
well.
C
Yeah
a
couple
of
questions,
I
suppose
the
obvious
one
initially
is
relates
to
Affordable
and
I
know
what
you're
saying
about
buying
out
of
our
affordable
policy
but
I
suppose
the
question
is
because
we
ask
it
throughout
the
city,
the
city.
Actually,
why
can't
you
provide
the
affordables
on
site?
And
the
second
question
relates
to
the
tros.
C
F
Yeah
sorry,
the
purpose
of
the
tros
is
exactly
for
the
reason
that
you,
you
think
it's
for
it's
to
prevent
people
that
live
in
in
this
accommodation
from
being
able
to
park
on
the
roads
around
around
the
sides
and
that
that's
it
really.
It's
already
quite
heavily
restricted
and
the
the
tros
that
have
been
looked
at
by
my
colleagues
in
traffic
are
based
around
increasing
those
restrictions.
F
So
it's
adding
double
yellow
lines
and,
and
that
sort
of
thing
to
so
that
anybody
living
on
this
side
and
potentially
not
having
one
of
the
parking
spaces
that
are
available
to
them
on
the
site
because
they
have
to
pay
for
them.
So
it's
to
discourage
them
from
either
a
living
here
and
parking
the
car
somewhere
else.
But
certainly
it's
about
not
increasing
the
problems
with
entry
parking
around
this
site.
S
Yeah
kind
of
around
the
parking.
Obviously,
we've
done
a
lot
of
research
into
this
kind
of
emerging
form
of
accommodation
and
because
you're
dealing
with
Colin
new
graduates
and
generally
young
professionals.
The
demand
on
parking
seems
to
be
quite
low.
S
They
tend
to
be
reliant
on
either
walking
to
work
and
or
working
from
home
or
reliant
on
public
transport,
because
they
do
tend
to
be
more
in
terms
of
connectivity
with
City,
centers
and
Central
Business
districts.
So
the
demand
park
it
tends
to
be
lower
than
you
would
have
with
the
traditional
residential
scheme.
M
Thanks
chair
I'd
like
to
ask
a
few
questions
around
the
the
minimum
space
standards
and
our
policy
as
well
so
I
may
need
officers
to
come
in
please.
While
we
were
on
site
today,
we
were
told
that
it's
a
mix
of
one
and
two
bedrooms.
M
The
one
bedrooms
didn't
get
a
parking
space.
The
two
bedrooms
did
get
a
parking
space
was
what
we
were
told
on
site
today
now
you've,
given
us
the
a
minimum
standard
that
you
say,
you're
looking
at
about
30
square
meters
per
unit
and
then
the
about
eight
meters
squared
in
shared
accommodation.
M
So
two
questions
there
number
one
is
that
just
the
one
bedrooms.
So
what
is
the
two
bedroom
square
footage
or
meter
squared
or
whatever
I'm
old-fashioned?
Sorry,
and
the
other
thing
is:
there's
an
element
of
public
shared
space
on
the
lower
ground
floor.
You
know
the
ground
floor
is
that
taking
into
account
in
your
shared
space
calculation
for
all.
Thank
you.
Yeah.
N
So
I'll
take
the
second
Point.
First,
if
you
want
to
say
the
first
one
yeah,
the
the
calculation
for
the
8.4
square
meters
is,
is
solely
from
the
private
access
that
the
occupiers
will
have
to
the
shared
spaces.
So
that's
the
shared
kitchens,
Lounge
spaces
and
balconies
included
in
that.
So
overall,
each
occupier
does
have
access
to
38
on
average
as
a
minimum
38.4
square
meters,
including
that
shared
space.
So
it's
not
been
the
core
Living
Model
isn't
taking
space
away
from
them.
S
Yeah
I
think
just
to
clarify
that
points
out
the
ground
floor.
Space
isn't
included
within
the
8.4
square
meters.
That's
in
addition
to
and
as
we've
alluded
to,
residents
will
also
have
access
to
the
additional
facilities
in
the
adjoining
Glassworks,
but
again
they're
excluded
from
the
8.4
square
meters
of
communal
space
per
resident.
S
In
terms
of
the
size
of
the
pumps,
the
one
two
bedroom
I,
don't
know
where
that's
come
from.
It
certainly
wasn't
discussion
I
had
with
anyone
this
morning
and
there's
no
reference
to
allocation
of
car
parking
spaces,
they're
they're
all
studio
apartments,
so
they
are
open
plan
living,
small
kitchenette,
ensuite,
bathroom
bedroom,
dining
desk,
so
the
they
are
true
studio.
Apartments.
R
Well,
it's
yeah
that
that's
correct,
I,
think
you
know
just
a
little
bit
of
misinformation
on
the
site
this
morning
when
reference
to
two
bedrooms,
they're
all
they're,
all
rules.
Thank
God.
We
couldn't
see.
M
We
would
we
would
definitely
told
on
site
that
yeah
the
one
bedroom
would
not
be
allocated
as
face
to
two
bedrooms.
Would.
F
But
if
I
can
clear
it
up,
it
was
me
that
said
that,
unfortunately,
I
was
briefed
incorrectly
this
morning
before
foreign,
so
I
apologize
for
that.
S
I
I
think
it
as
with
any
business.
It
would
probably
be
first,
come
first
served
but
as
I
say,
when
we've
done
research
into
a
co-living
model
where
they
they
operate
in
in
other
cities,
the
demand
on
car
parking
is
is
very
minimal.
That
seems
to
be
the
experience
of
of
existing
co-living
operators.
B
It
just
might
be
worth
considering
the
fact
that
a
two-bedroom
has
got
probably
at
least
two
people
in,
so
they
might
have
more
need
for
a
cast
paced
in
single
individual.
S
Two
bed,
pumps,
they're
all
Studios
and
the
the
expectation
generally
again
in
Cloud
living
is
they
tend
to
be
kind
of
single
occupants.
It's
it's
quite
rare
to
see
couples
living
in
co-living
space.
G
So
so
can
I
just
get
it
clear
in
my
head,
they're
all
single
occupancies.
N
So
there's
there's
a
couple
of
different
unit
types,
so
there's
the
the
duplexes
at
ground
floor,
which
is
they
have
a
sort
of
mezzanine
level
internally
and
yeah,
but
across
the
development
they're
all
one
one
bed,
units
yeah
so.
D
G
So
so
they
are
saying
that
this
is
for
graduate
age,
30
plus.
N
It
varies
it's
it's
often
I
think
the
policy
would
be
that
anybody's
open
to
apply
it's
just.
It
tends
to
be
the
more
attractive
model
to
that
age,
group
and
I
think
yeah.
The
the
fact
that
they're
all
one
beds
is
it
might
offer
the
opportunity
to
take
pressure
off
existing
family
housing
in
in
the
area
which
is
being
taken
up
by
by
people
like
this,
who
are
living
in
a
sort
of
multi-family
HMO.
N
B
Thank
you,
but
we
had
a
different
impression
on
site
Elsa
Smith
again,
please.
M
Sorry
so
that
brings
me
on
to
the
question
of
our
housing
mix
within
the
city,
because,
if
they're
all
one
bedroom,
then
that
doesn't
fit
in
with
our
housing
mix
at
all.
M
It
also
concerns
me
because,
if
it
you
know,
if
we're
expecting,
you
know
just
a
single
person
to
live
in
this
accommodation,
they
may
have
broken
up
in
a
relationship
and
they
may
have
children
that
come
to
visit
and
come
to
stay.
So
how
would
they
that
well?
How
would
that
be
accommodated?
Really
if
we've
got
such
a
small
amount
of
space,
how
would
you
know
a
parent
bring
their
child
to
come
and
stay
overnight?
M
N
So,
just
on
the
on
the
first
point
in
the
housing
mix,
I
think
people
living
is
a
the
difficulty.
Is
it's
not
got
a
defined
policy
in
the
leads?
You
know
the
adopted
local
plan
and
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
constitute
a
typical
residential
development.
That's
subject
to
housing,
mixed
policy,
it's
designed
to
to
meet
a
very
specific
need
for
a
specific,
specific
group
of
people
and
that
the
the
intention
is.
It
takes
pressure
off
other
dwellings
and
other
more
suitable
types
of
housing
for
for
larger
families.
N
I
can't
speak
to
the
specific
example,
but
I
don't
know
if
visitors
are
not
prohibited
or
anything
like
that
from
from
visiting
and
using
the
facilities.
B
It's
true
to
say,
though
we
are
developing
policies
on
it,
but
it's
a
very
sense
question
to
ask:
we
get
all
the
time
in
a
in
high
rise
in
the
city
center,
that
is
a
conformant
to
lead
standards
of
housing,
sizes
and
mix,
but
I
guess
this
is
more
akin
to
apart
hotels
than
say,
high-rise
for
rent
or
sale,
but
I
think
we
are
having
some
more
meetings
on
that
to
develop
policies
and
there's
also
the
possibility
of
the
panel
of
large
air
City
plans
panel
visiting
London
to
see
it
in
operation.
B
We
did
this
very
much
at
the
start
of
when
we
were
bringing
students
into
the
flat
and
like
glass
house
that
we
saw
today,
we
weren't
sure
how
they
work,
because
they,
the
room
sizes,
was
extremely
small
and
in
clusters.
So
we
made
a
number
of
visits,
one
in
London,
one
in
Sheffield
and
some
of
the
legion
when
they
were
built
and
that
way
members
were
satisfied
that
there
was
adequate
space
for
people
to
enjoy
living
there
and
the
environment
around
them.
N
I
just
come
in
on
that
we're
not
you
know
too
keen
on
on
comparing
it
with
with
other
cities,
but
in
terms
of
the
other
schemes
that
we've
seen
and
other
guidance
in
other
cities.
The
minimum
30
square
meters
we're
proposing,
does
exceed
the
guidance
in
the
other
cities.
N
So
that's
just
another
another
point
to
make
we're
trying
to
on
on
London
schemes.
They
have
to
achieve
I,
think
five
square
meters
of
shared
space,
in
addition
to
the
private
rooms
and
we're
we're
obviously
hitting
hitting
8.4
to
try
and
really
demonstrate
we're
going
over
and
above
those
those
other
cities.
B
Thanks
for
that,
Oliver
I
did
notice
room
sizes.
You
may
well
be
setting
the
standard
for
the
developments
of
this
nature
to
come
forward.
Neil.
Please.
L
I
just
want
to
I
I
support
this
game.
Definitely
with
I
don't
know.
I
know,
we've
got
people
who
are
saying
you
know
that
various
things
about
it
and
issues
with
it,
I,
don't
know.
L
If
anyone
here
I've
been
in
some
of
the
student
accommodation,
that's
sprung
up
in
the
city,
I've
done
interviews
with
some
journalism,
students
that
kind
of
stuff,
they're,
brilliant,
they're,
absolutely
fantastic
and
there's
someone
with
the
students
on
he
would
love
living
in
somewhere
like
that
when
he
gets
to
18.,
because
that's
what
they're
looking
for
places
to
socialize
and
be
with
friends
and
that
kind
of
stuff
I
think
this
is
a
brilliant
move
on
from
being
a
student.
L
We
know
in
corvid
during
kovid
that
you
know
people
who
were
living
in
Flats.
You
know
people
who
were
living
alone
in
Flats.
We
had
a
lot
of
issues
around
isolation.
Obviously
you
won't
be
able
to
socialize
during
Corbin
I
understand
that.
But
you
know
it
threw
up
that
issue
of
isolation
of
all
these
flats
that
we're
throwing
up
in
the
city
which
are
lovely
and
fantastic
but
or
you
are
living
in
in
a
flat.
L
Looking
out
on
the
world-
and
this
really
came
so
far
during
kovid,
so
I
think
this
is
a
really
good
way
of
people
being
able
to.
You
know
make
that
move
from
being
a
student
to
to
working,
but
also
have
you
know
not
moving
into
then
a
flat
and
being
isolated.
It's
the
kind
of
a
you
know
that
transition,
so
they
have
space
to
be
with
people
and
and
socialize
that
kind
of
thing.
So
it
stops
that
isolation
that
that
people
face
by
living
alone
in
a
flat
and
also
with
the
hmos.
L
It's
a
good
point
because
we
know
in
the
area
there
are
housing
family
housing
that
is
being
used
for
student
accommodation,
but
also
for
what
we
call
professionals,
young
professionals
in
in
heading
Landing,
wheatwood,
where
I'm
candidate
and
and
and
we
want
to
free
those
houses
up
to
go
back
into
as
family
housing.
B
We
are
on
questions
I
I
did
like,
but
we
may
have
a
few
questions
for
us
to
teach
some
more
information,
how
the
applicants
Council
walshop.
Please.
J
It
was
a
question
for
officers
actually
chair
when
the
time
comes
on
now.
If
you
want,
it
depends
refresh
my
memory.
How
far
along
are
we
till
we
get
an
SPD
so
that
we
have
a
a
codified
policy,
leads?
What's
the
timeline
between
now
and
that
we're
achieving
that.
O
I
think
I
think
when
this
matter
went
to
development
plans
panel.
There
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
it
being
bolted
onto
another
policy.
I
think
it
was
HMO
and
the
space
standards
if
I
recall
correctly
and
that's
not
appropriate.
This
is
a
different
product
in
the
market,
which
requires
some
policy
consideration.
I
think
the
view
was
that
they're
going
to
put
some
extra
resource
in
that
when
that's
going
to
be
done,
I
cannot
answer
I'm,
afraid.
B
H
I
just
wanted
to
ask
about
affordability,
what
kind
of
rental
price
are
these
units
currently
and
what
do
you
anticipate
there
would
be
in
Leeds.
S
Okay
in
terms
of
our
financial
modeling,
we're
looking
around
I
think
for
the
standard
Studio
around
295
pounds
per
week
and
I
think
the
duplex
is
about
350
pounds
a
week,
but
that's
an
all-inclusive
rent,
so
that
includes
all
their
bills
and
obviously
all
access
to
the
communal
facilities
so
kind
of
On,
a
par
to
kind
of
traditional
student
accommodation.
S
H
We
talk
and
continue
right
being
a
follow-on
from
student,
accommodation
and
I
know.
That's
perhaps
the
model
you
have
in
mind,
however,
easy
very
rigid
that
or
say
if
I
came
along,
obviously
not
being
a
student
for
a
very
long
time
and
said
I
want
to
rent
one.
Would
that
be
a
problem
because
it
would
wouldn't
fit
in
your
in
your
scheme.
S
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
preclusion
on
anybody
living
there.
I
think
it's
just
the
appeal
of
that
that
form
of
accommodation
and
what
it
offers
tends
to
appeal
to
the
younger,
professional
and
new
graduate,
but
there's
certainly
be
no
exclusion
on
age
or
profession,
foreign.
B
H
I'm
concerned
that
I
I
thought
we'd
shall
this
perhaps
isn't
popular,
but
I
thought
we'd
moved
away
from
building
tenement
blocks,
I'm
not
suggesting
this
is
a
tenement
block,
but
the
way
of
living
lends
itself
to
that
description
a
long
time
ago,
and
I
personally
would
like
to
see
something
a
little
bit
more
substantial
where
people
can
have
old
facilities
within
their
space
and
then
socialize
as
well.
If
they
want
to
it
just
seems
to
me
this
is
a
retrograde
step
for
us
and
I
know.
H
There's
lots
of
talk
about
freeing
other
houses
up.
I,
don't
believe!
That's
the
case,
because
landlords
calf
houses
are
based
on
cost
money.
They
can
get
more
money
by
renting
them
to
six
or
seven
students
and
how
much
my
son
used
to
pay
then
renting
it
to
a
family.
So
until
we
get
rent,
Caps
or
whatever
I
think
we'll
carry
on
carving
those
houses
up
into
different
Flats,
because
they're
getting
much
more
money.
M
Thanks
chair,
I
I
agree,
and
this
feels
like
a
backward
step
in
terms
of
accommodation
for
our
residents.
I
I've,
no
doubt
that
it
would
be
quality
accommodation
based
on
what
we
saw
today,
and
it
is
very
impressive
what
we
did
see
today.
M
However,
that
is
student
accommodation
where
they
only
live
for
a
certain
amount
of
time,
and
then
they
go
home
and
then
they
return.
This
is
somebody's
permanent
home
and
1300
pounds
per
calendar
month,
ish
for
what
is
effectively
a
bed,
I
I
think
that's,
it's
very
overpriced
and
I
I.
Personally,
don't
like
this
idea:
I,
don't
like
it
in
our
city
and
I,
think
we
we
will
sell
in
our
residents
short.
Thank
you.
C
I
think
we
are
slightly
hampered
because
Council
does
not
have
a
specific
policy
to
Regard
in
regard
to
this
particular
housing
model,
and
it
seems
we
haven't
actually
got
any
leads
as
far
as
I'm
aware,
but
it
seems
from
the
expense
of
City
plans
in
particular
that
a
number
of
developers
are
now
looking
at
this
as
a
model,
but
I.
Think
from
my
point
of
view,
is
we
have
to
treat
it
in
a
different
way
to
the
way
we
talk
about
student
accommodation.
C
Now
those
of
you
who
know
me
know
that
I've
argued
for
a
long
long
time
in
relation
particularly
to
the
amount
of
space
people
have
in
in
dwellings,
and
it
took
a
lot
of
time,
but
eventually
the
council
came
up
with
some
minimum
standards
for
the
size
of
flats
and
for
the
size
of
student
accommodation
actually
and
I
think
that
this
apparently
doesn't
meet
policy,
because
policy
would
be
you'd
have
30..
C
What's
it
37
square
meters
of
flat
and
and
other
things
as
well,
so
we've
been
asked
to
set
aside
policy
on
this
I
know
we
aren't
making
a
decision
today,
but
I
think
we
have
to
think
long
and
hard
about
that
that
principle
and
if
we
talk
about
other
elements
of
what
you're
proposing
for
us
today
well,
let's
be
positive
anything
that
that
gets
Burley
Library
back
in
in
reasonable
condition-
and
you
know
the
city
council
needs
to
hold
its
owns
upon
this
one
because
they
let
it
happen,
but
anything
that
gets
Burley
Library,
which
is
a
really
significant
building
down
that
road
back
into
use.
C
I
think
by
default
must
be
a
good
thing
and
so
I
suppose
that's
on
the
right
side
of
the
scales
and
I
think
I'm
thinking
positively,
because
you
appear
to
be
saying
to
us:
you're
actually
going
to
do
something
and
retain
a
lot
of
the
interior,
which
has
that
which
has
some
real
value.
I.
Think
but
I
really
do
have
problems,
because
much
of
the
rest
of
what
you're
doing
is
just
not
policy
compliant.
In
my
opinion
and
I
I,
there
isn't
the
amenity
space
that
we'd
normally
require
the
car
parking.
C
As
we
know,
this
is
accommodation
which
is
open
to
all
it's
not
specifically
to
students,
because
we
can
condition
for
students,
so
anybody,
I,
Could,
Turn
Up
For
example
and
I
appreciate
what
you're
saying
about
the
the
tro,
but
actually
the
the
tro
he's
designed
to
stop
the
people
who
live
here
parking
on
the
road,
but
it
also
stops
everybody
else
who
currently
parks
there.
C
So
you're
actually
causing
more
issues,
I
suppose
for
some
of
the
people
who
currently
live
in
the
area
and
I
I
as
I
often
say,
what's
the
point
of
having
a
policy,
if
you
don't
stick
to
it,
and
so
I
have
some
concerns
about
this.
That
said,
that
said,
I
think
and
you've
alluded
to
it.
Chair
and
I've
asked
the
director.
If
we
can
expedite
this
particular
matter,
because
I
think
the
council
needs
are
certainly
Council
officers
need
a
steer
from
Members
as
to
where
we
want
to
go
with
this
type
of
accommodation.
C
Now,
I
don't
think
we
want
to
replicate
what
happens
in
London,
because
we
want
the
Leeds
policy
that
works
for
leads,
not
not
that
works
in
London
and
is
transplanted.
So
at
the
moment,
I
have
some
serious
reservations.
I
have
said
in
the
past
in
relation
to
what
we
looked
at
on
City
plans:
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
closing
the
door
on
this
as
a
as
a
housing
model,
but
actually
what
we
see.
C
What
we
need
to
be
sure
of
is
that
if
you
create
this
housing
model,
it's
not
being
used
to
in
effect
circumvent
some
of
the
other
elements
of
policy
that
we
have,
which
we
would
be
insisting
on
in
this
development
if
it
was
Flats,
so
I
I'm
as
I,
say,
I'm
ambivalent
towards
the
principle.
C
But
at
the
moment
I
think
there
are
a
number
of
issues
in
relation
to
what
we
would
normally
regard
as
policy,
which
is
size,
that's
a
matter
of
opinion,
but
certainly
to
do
with
immunity
space,
because
there
isn't
any.
C
And
ironically,
the
the
student
blocked.
Next
to
us
has
a
really
well
laid
out
piece
of
amenity,
space
and
I.
Think
we're
just
trying
to
cram
too
much
on
this
particular
site
and
quickly
on
design.
Sorry,
this
may
well
be
the
something
that
was
agreed,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
that
building
at
the
back
frames,
the
Burley
library
in
a
way
I,
would
like.
L
No
and
I
I've
made
my
comments,
but
one
one
thing
I'm
concerned
about
is
the
price
I
think
350
a
week
and
that's
a
lot
more
than
when
he
said:
that's
just
more
than
students.
That's
a
lot
more
than
students
pay.
L
So
you
know
for
a
student
block,
so
I'm
concerned
about
the
price
I.
Think
for
for
what
the
space
that's
been
offered.
I
think
350
a
week
is
a
lot
of
money.
I
know
we
can't
condition
that
in
anything
we
do,
but
I
just
want
to
make
the
point
that
I
think
it's
a
lot,
it's
expensive
for
what
the
space
that
you're
offering
that's
all.
J
May
be
the
last
thanks:
yeah
I
find
myself
very
much
in
a
card
with
what
council
houses
wouldn't
counselor
Campbell
has
said
there
is
an
awful
awful
lot
of
good
in
these
proposals.
J
I
think
the
the
standard
of
work
we
saw
in
the
development
next
story
is
really
high.
I,
don't
have
any
doubt
in
the
developers
ability
to
develop
a
good
project
and
manage
a
good,
a
good
project,
as
you
were
going
forward.
J
This
is
this
development
of
butts
right
onto
my
ward,
yeah
I
think
there
are
some
concerns
at
the
moment,
though
I
think
they're
all
eminently
resolvable,
chair,
I,
think,
first
of
all,
for
years
we
fought
long
and
hard
across
multiple
administrations
to
get
minimum
space
standards
in
this
country
and
I'm
very
concerned
about.
J
Whilst
we
don't
have
a
dedicated
Leeds
policy
for
co-living
ourselves,
I'm
concerned
about
what
precedent
we
could
set
really
gets
back
to
those
space
standards,
even
it
is
free
a
new
product,
as
it
were,
of
co-living
very
protective
of
space
standards
in
something
that
isn't
student
accommodation.
So
there
are
some
concerns
that
I
think
they
are
resolvable,
though
so,
for
example,
obviously
development's
got
to
be
viable.
We
can
discuss
market
pricing.
J
It's
not
particularly
planning
concern,
but
I
appreciate
comments
by
Council
haswood
about
that
I
think
the
applicant
needs
to
do
some,
some
serious
Market,
more
further
market
research
on
that.
That
does
seem
a
high
price
point
for
the
for
the
neighborhood.
So
to
speak,
and
and
especially
in
comparison
with
relatively
comparable
they're,
not
exactly
comparable
developments.
I
think
the
the
code,
the
co-shared
spaces
in
this
proposal
will
be
exceptional,
but
they'll
need
to
be
a
purpose
and
I
appreciate
you
going
for
a
very
short-term.
J
You
know
short-term
stays
and
short-term
lets
and
I.
Think
that's
again.
A
new
and
interesting
angle,
which
I
think
is,
is
worthy
of
fitting
into
the
Leeds
housing
mix.
But
I
do
come
back
to
the
being
protective
about
space
standards
chair.
So
it's
a
suggestion
in
terms
of
viability
and
achieving
space
standards.
Is
there
an
argument
for
officers
to
take
away
with
the
applicant
and
see
what
other
colleagues
on
the
panel
think
about
trading
hype
for
numbers?
J
Well,
if
you
know,
is
that
something
we
should
consider
that
could
be
a
height
could
be
a
way
out
of
increased
height
could
be
a
way
to
achieving
a
satisfactory
solution.
All
around
that'd
be
something
I
think
we
should
consider.
P
J
Yeah
taller
building
lines
of
residential
units
yeah
something
to
put
forward
I
mean
why
not,
if
that,
achieves
a
satisfactory
outcome.
I
do
take
the
the
point
about
immunity,
space
I
think
that's,
that's
something
I
think
we've
all
learned
to
reappreciate
in
the
last
few
years
and
I
think
that
that
needs
considering
I
do
agree.
J
Actually
I
very
much
agree
with
the
parking
approach,
though
I
think
most
of
the
people
staying
here
will
not
be
car
owners
or
users
hi
car
patent
can
I
use
patterns,
are
changing
rapidly
Chef
for
people
that
the
development's
aiming
for
I
think
we
need
to
consider
that
in
terms
of
design,
I
think
it's
a
good
start
and
I
I,
quite
like
the
basic
thrust
of
it.
J
All
I
think
some
work
regarding
the
framing,
as
someone's
already
mentioned,
who
mentioned
framing
Council
Campbell
yeah
thanks
I,
think
that
needs
a
bit
of
work,
but
the
ground
floor
where
the
care
and
attention
shown
to
the
Burley
Library
building
is
really
impressive,
and
the
overall
approach
to
the
duplex
units
think
is
really
really
good.
J
So
I
wouldn't
want
to
lose
the
the
good
and
I
think
in
terms
of
where
you
you
sort
of
you're
planning
me
to
raise
for
absolutely
yes
and
absolutely
no
I,
think
I
think
this
is
looking
positive,
but
I
just
think.
There's
some
work
to
be
done.
That
I
think
actually,
both
members
of
the
panel
officers
and
the
applicants
need
to
be
reasonably
pragmatic
about.
J
Oh
just
just
one
last
thing:
the
key
issue
in
the
area
in
terms
of
transport
and
movement
is
speeding
traffic,
so
contributions
towards
so,
for
example,
on
Alexander
Road,
we're
looking
to
put
in
a
fairly
substantial
traffic
calming
chicane
and
speed
bumps
solution.
So
it's
that
that
kind
of
approach
to
those
contributions
towards
those
those
things
will
be
most
welcome
by
the
local
community.
B
Thank
you,
Council
walshaw
I
think
you
have
summed
it
up.
Well,
it
is
a
new
direction
for
Leeds
and
I.
Think
in
general.
We
could,
if
there's
a
need
for
it.
We
could
welcome
it,
but
we
do
need
to
refine
our
policies
and
we
need
to
be
sure
what
we're
getting
and
that
will
happen.
I
think
the
planning
Authority
has
been
a
bit
slow
on
this
because
we've
it's
been
with
us
for
over
a
year
it
started
near
when
you
showed
the
development
plans
panels,
didn't
they
yeah
I
thought.
B
So
so
it's
quite
it's
quite
a
while,
but
it's
a
good
start
and
I,
and
we
will
get
your
opinions
on
the
questions
next,
but
before
I
do
can
I
invite
Mr
Butler
to
comment.
I
think
he
would
rather
do
so.
P
This
is
to
the
applicant,
but
also
to
the
member
of
panel
and
I.
Remember
saying
something
similar
when
we
first
started
visiting
the
student
schemes
and
one
of
the
earlier
ones
councilor
McKenna's
already
referred
to,
which
is
a
writer
scheme
down
in
in
Sheffield
I,
think
I
think
we're
kind
of
missing
the
point
of
what
the
demand
is
trying
to
meet
here,
which
is
Young
graduate
professionals
who
wish
to
continue.
P
In
my
opinion,
a
semi-student
lifestyle,
because
they've
got
used
to
that
for
what
would
be
mostly
in
most
cases,
I
think
a
relatively
short
period
in
terms
of
their
whole
life.
Until
there's
a
point
where
you
know
their
situation,
changes
in
terms
of
income
dependence,
responsibilities,
Etc
at
which
point
I
think
it's
clear.
P
The
occupiers
would
be
anticipated
to
move
on
to
my
considered
a
more
traditional
form
of
accommodation
such
as
what
most
of
us
around
this
table
because
of
our
age
occupy
now,
so
I
think
we
just
need
to
be
a
little
bit.
You
know
just
give
a
bit
more
thought
to
actually
what
the
demand
this
is
trying
to
meet
and
just
another
comment
that
I
just
wanted
to
make
and
say
I
think.
Perhaps
the
the
applicants
need
to
articulate
that,
perhaps
in
a
clearer
way
when
they
come
back.
P
But
it's
interesting
when
I
was
listening
to
the
debate
again
today
and
we've
had
this
with
the
students
about
the
concern
over
the
38.4
square
meters.
You
kind
of
get
fixated,
don't
you
that
these
people
are
going
to
be
put
in
a
38.4
square
meter
box,
but
the
reality
of
this
they've
got
a
30
meter,
Square
personal
space,
which
is
theirs,
but
in
reality
the
8.4.
Is
it
it's
a
benchmark?
P
Isn't
it
because
the
reality
is,
there
will
be
significantly
more
space
that
they
have
access
to
I
mean
it
could
be
60,
70,
100,
300
square
meters
throughout
the
whole
building,
because
they'll
have
access
to
it
all
so
I
just
think
we
need
to
take
care
of
that
when
we
actually
start
to
ultimately
come
to
a
decision
on
this
or
just
think
about
it.
Before
we
get
to
to
the
to
to
a
decision
making.
P
Time
and
again
the
Reds,
the
the
applicants
did
say
and
the
references
made
to
the
immunity
space
and
the
Glass
Works
residents
will
have
access
to
that
amenity
space,
but
also
the
facilities
that
are
already
there
in
the
Glassworks.
There's,
no
intention
of
restricting
that,
and
and
just
my
own
personal
experience,
you
know,
I
have
a
car
site
in
the
car
park
up
here
at
the
moment,
which
has
been
used
about
once
a
week
at
the
moment.
P
P
So
there
is
a
massive
change
in
terms
of
the
use
of
the
car,
which
I
think
we
also
need
to
think
about,
but
then
go
back
to
the
age
of
the
people
that
are
doing
it
and
their
aspirations
of
the
lifestyles
and
probably
a
better
understanding
of
green
and
environmental
issues
may
not
necessarily
want
to
have
a
car
and
want
to
be
in
an
area.
That's
got
good
transport
links
and
they
are
familiar
with
because
they
have
spent
a
significant
period
of
the
last
three
to
four
years
actually
in
in
a
student
environment.
P
So
I
think
we
just
need
to
take
care
that
we're
not
imposing
our
own
ideas
of
what
we
consider
to
be
adequate
accommodation
which
might
be
three
four
bed
semi
or
detached
property
when
you're
a
life
well
actually
you're.
Looking
for
something
quite
different.
Sorry
that
was
a
speech
but
I
just
think.
We
need
to
think
about
that.
Going
forward.
B
C
Mean
if
Mr
Butler
being
a
member
of
the
plans
panel
I,
would
have
expected
that
to
be
a
speech
from
them
but
I'm.
Sorry,
I,
don't
expect
that
to
be
a
speech
from
officers
at
the
moment,
we're
we're
feeling
our
way
forwards.
I,
don't
think
anybody's
actually
said
no
to
any
of
this,
have
they
we've
all
said:
yeah,
okay,
we
we
can.
We
can
have
a
look
at
this,
see
how
it
goes,
but
we
have
certain
constraints
and
effectively.
C
What
you've
just
said
to
us
to
me
appears
to
me
is
to
say
well
just
throw
out
all
the
policies
we've
got,
which
we've
spent
a
long
time
putting
together,
because
this
is
a
new
type
of
development
yeah.
It
is
a
new
type
of
development
and,
yes,
we
probably
need
to
develop
some
new
policies,
but
we
need
to.
C
But
if
you
create
a
situation
where
you
allow,
in
effect,
these
are
flats
for
everybody
they're,
not
student
Flats
like
this
is
the
whole
point,
we're
making
a
mistake
here,
because
you
keep
saying
it
and
the
developers
keep
saying
it.
This
is
for
people
who
are
moving
on
from
students.
It's
not
it's
for
anybody.
We
can't
condition
the
fact
that
you
you've
got
to
be
a
graduate
of
lead
University
in
under
25..
C
It's.
We
can
condition
it
if
you're
a
student,
but
we
can't
condition
it
if,
for
anything
else
now,
I
I
thought
we
would
more
or
less
got
there
in
that
we
would
we'd
said
in
effect,
yeah
we're
okay
in
principle,
to
go.
Talk
this
one
through
a
bit
more.
We
have
some
concerns
about
some
of
the
elements
about
what
this
proposal
will
do
and
that
needs
to
go
away
and
people
need
to
reflect
on
that
and
I
thought.
That's
where
we
were.
B
And
you
know
the
old
saying
on
planning
officers,
advise
members
decide
and
I
always
allow
people
to
speak.
As
you
know,
maybe
maybe
too
much
kill
us
about
them.
Please.
K
I
guess
there
is
one
precedent:
I
am
slightly
worried
about
and
it
is
a
cost
I'm
really
concerned
that
the
president
will
actually
increase
the
cost
on
on
all
the
communal
living.
Especially,
there
is
student
accommodation
with
communal
living
kind
of
right
next
door
and
I
I
on
a
design
function,
I
actually
really
like
it,
and
there
are
some
aspects
that
I
am
concerned
about,
but
I
don't
I,
don't
think
it's
been
Quantified
that
prize
Mark
personally
of
what
I've
seen
today
and
that's
my
major
concern.
B
I
think
we
probably
have
we've
had
a
really
good
discussion
on
it.
Can
we
move
on
then
to
page
60,
and
there
are
four
questions
to
answer.
Some
of
them
are
difficult
to
answer.
I
have
to
say
and
I
don't
expect
that
we
could
cover
them.
Really,
yes
or
no,
but
I
could
be
surprised
on
that
one.
The
first
one
do
members
support
the
principle
of
Cole,
live
and
and
the
immunity
offered
by
the
development
that
could
be
a
yes
I.
Think.
C
Well,
that
that's
that's
it's
not
a
straight.
Yes!
Is
it?
It's
a
I
think
you
might
say
it's
a
qualified.
Yes,.
B
B
Secondly,
do
member
support
the
approach
to
affordable
housing
provision
for
this
co-development,
that
is,
that
there'll
be
no
affordable
on
site,
but
the
money
will
be
given
to
the
council
to
provide
it
elsewhere
on
another
site,
foreign.
B
B
B
B
That
that's
an
open
question
regards
to
the
executive
board
and
they
put
in
a
pool
and
the
user
to
improve
existing
housing
stock
or
they
provide
new
homes
as
they
have.
The
lunice
leads
saying
something:
I
forget
the
name
of
it.
They've
built
some
there,
but
because
the
executive,
one
it'll,
be
money
well
spent.
If
that's
the
direction
we
recommended.
J
Neil
now
yeah
yeah
thanks
Jay
I,
mean
typically
I'm
very
much
in
favor
of
affordables
on
site.
However,
affordables
on
site
would
be
offered
at
I,
think
80
of
market
rate
I'm,
not
sure,
that's
tremendously
affordable.
J
Given
the
discussions
we've
had
this
afternoon,
whereas
a
commutative
term,
the
housing
team
can
deploy
that,
and
we
have
quite
an
ambitious
program
of
improvements
and
given
some
of
the
budget
issues
at
the
moment,
I
think,
for
example,
taking
decarbonizing
properties
and
taking
it
out
of
the
heating
systems
out
of
existing
Council
properties,
will
be
with
more
direct
benefit
to
the
people
of
Leeds
than
some
percent
of
units
that
are
a
thousand
pounds
a
month
instead
of
1300
pounds
a
month.
I
just
think
we
colleagues
should
bear
that
in
mind.
At
this
point.
C
Well,
I
know
individual
involves
on
this
I'm
sorry,
but
we
we
I,
understand
what
you're
saying,
but
the
the
affordable
pot
is
not
about
decarbonizing
property.
It's
about
saying,
look.
We
have
a
policy
that
says
we
should
have
seven
percent:
affordable
housing
in
this
area.
That's
affordable,
housing
on
site
now
developers
do
have
the
ability,
because
the
executive
board
gave
them
that
ability
to
buy
out
of
that.
But
if
this
is
what
60
odd
units
or
seven
percent
will
be
some
do
some
mass
for
me,
somebody
half
a
dozen
half
a
dozen
units.
C
This
is
half
a
dozen
units
on
side.
If
you
take
the
commuting,
some
and
I
know
you're
not
listening,
but
if
you
take
the
commuted
sum
you
do
not
get
half
a
dozen
units,
you
only
get
the
financial
contribution
and
that
will
not
buy
another
unit,
so
you
may
get
if
you
look
at
instead
of
six
units,
you're
going
to
get
four
affordable
units,
so
actually
it's
a
way
of
it
by
buying
out
by
buying
out
the
affordable,
you
actually
get
less
affordables
and
that's
that's
the
thing
now.
J
B
I
think
that's
fairly
straightforward.
We
we've
had
a
discussion
all
those
in
favor
of
not
having
any
affordable
on
the
site,
but
the
commuters
some
yet
to
be
determined
to
be
transferred
to
the
council.
Please
show.
B
Does
against
two
three
four
I
have
six
seven
seven
against?
Well,
that's
clearly,
a
no!
Then
okay,
so
officers
have
had
us
here
on
that
members
have
had
to
say
on
a
democracy
and
action
well
done.
Moving
on
your
members
support
the
design
of
the
extension
and
worked
a
grade.
Two
listed
Burleigh
Library
yeah.
There
was
comments
around.
Rather
the
design
of
the
building
wasn't
the
extension.
C
D
C
J
Think
yeah
on
that
I
think
that
what's
actually
Pros
for
the
existing
Library
building
now
is
exemplary.
I
think
it's!
It's
really
great
work,
I
think
in
terms
of
framing
it
just
needs
a
bit
of
work.
I.
Do
think,
though,
that,
given
the
nature
of
the
application
and
the
size
of
the
build,
you
know
as
someone
who's
advocated
trading
height
for
more
space
concerning
complaint
units,
the
building's
always
going
to
slightly
overpower
the
existing
building.
M
Thanks
chair,
I
I
applaud
what
they're
doing
to
the
library
it's
beautiful.
Building,
I
I
used
to
use
it
regularly.
Many
years
ago,
myself
with
yet
with
my
son
I,
do
think
that
the
the
extension
that
sort
of
bulk
and
the
massing
of
that
needs
to
needs
to
be
toned
down
I
think
it
is
overpowering
and
it's
overbearing
in
that
area
as
well.
B
If
I
can
paraphrase
we're
happy
with
proposals
for
the
library,
but
we
think
the
extension
could
do
a
bit
more
work.
Yes,
okay,
finally,
do
members
support
the
park
and
provision
and
Highway
Works
associated
with
the
development.
J
Yeah
the
key
issue
is:
is
there
is
quite
a
lot
of
opportunity
parking
in
the
area,
but
the
keys
for
local
residents
is
speeding.
Traffic
is
one
of
the
areas
where
we
tried
the
active
travel
neighborhood,
which
met
met
with
the
mixed
reception,
shall
we
say,
but
one
of
the
things
that
came
out
of
that
is
the
need
to
cut
traffic
speeds
down
on
numerous
roads
and
the
standout
one
is
Alexander
Road,
it's
a
really.
It's
still
a
dangerous
road
yeah.
J
K
Apologies:
apologies
so
I'm
just
going
to
go
back
up
to
some
on
the
other
question.
I
think
it'd
be
good
for
the
applicant
actually
for
members
to
kind
of
quantify
what
they
mean
in
the
design
aspect,
because
I'm
quite
contradictory
on
it,
because
I
personally
quite
like
designs
that
contradict
pre
the
sort
of
older
listed
buildings.
So
you
can
see
what
is
original
and
what's
not
and
I
think
we've
talked
about
the
framing
and
size,
but
if
it's
a
design
element,
then
I
think
I
think
it's.
K
The
applicants
really
should
probably
know
what
members
actually
opinions
are
on
that
I've
not
heard
an
opinion
from
Members
describing
like
the
the
design
element
of
it
rather
than
just
size,
because
a
lot
of
the
times
we're
not
going
to
get
a
reduction
in
size,
so
I
I
think
I.
Think
it's
for
members
to
actually
say
quite
openly
about
the
design
aspects.
K
B
P
I
think
we've
captured
that
we
need
to
go
back
to
the
applicant
and
just
look
at
whether
we
can
improve
to
tweak
the
design
rather
than
do
a
complete
overhaul,
because
the
issue
is,
we
think
it's
a
bit
over
dominant.
That
might
be
in
terms
of
really
the
materials
that
are
using
the
general
designers
rather
than
the
actual
size
itself.
I
C
I
think
should
be
useful
if
the
design
team
had
a
look
at
this
if
they
haven't
already
done
so
because
they
usually
come
back
with
some
good
suggestions.
It's
difficult
to
tell
with
about
materials,
because
this
we've
only
got
that
so
we
we
basically
asked
for
a
view.
C
You
know
you
would
normally
say
looking
at
the
balconies,
which
are
nice.
Actually,
the
balconies
are
just
going
to
look
at
the
roof
of
the
the
old
library.
You
know
there
are
a
number
of
tweaks
that
you
could
do
to
this
I
think
which
would
benefit
it.
I,
don't
agree
with
the
principle
of
raising
the
height,
because
it's
already
two
stories
higher
than
the
adjacent
buildings,
and
so
we've
got
a
lot
of.
C
We've
got
a
big
bulk
there
that,
and
it
goes
back
to
this
phrase,
about
how
do
you
frame
the
library
building,
because
that's
the
important
building,
not
this
one,
that's
the
important
building
and
I
think
if,
potentially,
if
the
design
team
got
a
look
at
it,
they
might
come
up
with
some
suggestions
that
we
could
support.
Okay,.
B
I
I
don't
think
we
need
to
spend
more
time
on
it.
We're
not
talking
about
major
rebuild
we're
talking
about
tweaks
here
and
there
to
make
it
more
interesting,
more
Parables
to
local
people.
It's
something
we
deal
with
all
the
time.
It'll
come
back
to
us,
probably
in
a
A
Renewed,
maybe
an
improved
form.
B
C
We
look
at
it
again,
I'm
going
to
say
no
on
that
one,
but
I
pick
up
what
council
wallshot
said,
I
think
if
we're
going
to
use
some
commuting
money,
then
what
you
were
talking
about,
which
seems
to
be
the
issue
in
the
area.
Okay,
there
are
some
issues
with
parking
on
corners
and
things
like
that.
But
it
seems
to
me
that
using
that
to
create
a
better
pedestrian
environment
in
the
area
would
be
a
better
use
of
that
money.
Sorry,
if
that's
heretical,
but
I.
B
I
think
we
need
to
be
clear
in
those
days
I
think
councilor
walshaw
talked
about
common
measures
on
the
Exotic
Alexander
Road,
putting
speed
bumps
in
Switzerland
can,
if
that
could
be
looked
at
John
yeah,
okay,
you
know
that
could
be
a
general
yes,
but
it
needs
looking
at
again
and
refined.
Yes,
yep,
okay,
we're
done
can
I
say
thank
Oliver
and
the
team
for
bearing
with
us
in
this
one,
but
you
do
realize
it's
new
to
Leeds.
We've
never
had
it
before
we're,
not
talking
about
replicating
London,
where
prices
are
very
high.
B
My
daughter
lives
and
works
there.
I
I
know
how
expensive
it
is.
It
leads.
Property
prices
are
cheaper,
so
we
can
have
bigger
accommodation
than
they
have
in
London,
but
it's
policies
we
need
to
sit
down,
we
need
to
have
a
workshop
and
we
need
to
think
of
it,
but
I
think
in
general
you
know
it's
a
green
light
move
in
that
direction
and
we
we
refine
our
policies
to
to
what
needs
to
be
for
for
a
new
direction
for
us.
Well,
thank
you
and
good
afternoon.