►
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
C
You
very
much
for
that.
Thank
you.
Colleagues
yeah.
It's
probably
whether
it's
time
to
remind
people
to
switch
their
mobile
devices
to
silent,
please
for
the
purpose
of
the
meeting
so
hi.
Whoever
is
that?
Could
you
please
switch
the
mobile
device
off?
Please
thanks
very
much
right.
Folks.
C
Welcome
to
south
and
west
plans
panel,
I've
heard
from
andy
our
esteemed
clark,
I'm
council,
neil
walsh,
heading
high
park,
ward
I'll,
be
chairing
this
afternoon's
meeting.
Today's
meeting
has
been
live
streamed
on
the
city
council
youtube
channel,
so
the
public
can
observe
the
meeting
without
needing
to
be
present.
South
and
west
plants
panels
deals
with
applications
from
the
south,
north
west
and
west
of
the
city.
C
They
are
the
panelists
here
all
the
relevant
information
from
applicants.
Members
of
the
public
and
council
officers
to
help
members
of
the
panel
make
their
decision
so
in
our
usual
manner
we're
going
to
do
some
introductions.
So,
as
I've
said,
I'm
councillor,
neil
walsh
and
I'll
just
go
to
my
left.
H
Good
afternoon
jules
hesselwood
councillor
for
bramley
and
standing
the
award.
A
C
Must
remember,
I
am
actually
chairing
the
meeting.
It's
a
good
stop.
Thank
you.
Council
reagan
right
more
seriously,
item
10!
I
it's
a
panel
request
that
I
put
in,
and
I've
lodged
an
objection
to
the
application.
So
at
that
point
I'll
be
recusing
myself
from
the
chair
and
we'll
need
to
elect
a
chair
for
that
item.
From
my
from
my
learned
colleagues,
that's
mine,
councillor
anderson.
J
Sorry
inspector
item
nine.
I
gave
the
applicants
advice
to
try
and
help
with
the
smooth
running
of
getting
this
through,
and
I
am
also
a
member
of
heading
with
rotary
who
are
connected
to
that
as
well.
So
again,
like
you
I'll,
be
recusing
myself
from
that
particular
item.
A
C
C
The
latter
okay,
so
we'll
take
those
as
read
so
minutes
of
page
nine
through
two,
as
we
are
a
wordy
bunch,
two
two
seven
page
seventeen
has
anyone
got
anything
they
like
to
raise
on
the
minutes.
Any
matters
arising
not
seeing
any
in
that
case.
Can
somebody
move
the
minutes
as
a
true
record.
Thank
you.
Accounts
oregon
right,
those
okay,
everybody
kept
meeting.
Okay
with
that,
yep
nods,
brilliant,
okay.
C
So
that's
item
six
out
of
the
way,
any
other
matters
arising
that
we
need
to
discuss
at
this
point:
nope:
okay,
good
right
in
that
case,
if
everyone
could
turn
their
hem
sheets
to
page
19,
that's
item
7,
which
is
sometimes
called
the
doggy
item.
In
the
conversation
regarding
this,
but
more
seriously,
it's
the
change
of
use
of
land,
paddock
and
woodland,
toad
or
pet
recreation
exercise
facility
at
car
farm
lodge.
So,
thank
you.
D
This
was
previously
reported
to
panel
back
in
february,
which
also
included
this
panel
site
visit
that
morning,
just
by
way
of
before
starting
the
presentation,
just
a
slight
error
at
paragraphs
5
and
13
in
the
report,
reference
is
made
to
number
22
clara
drive.
It
is
actually,
in
fact
number
28
clara
drive,
so
apologies
for
that
in
summary,
and
for
the
benefit
of
new
panel
members
which
we've
got
here
today,
the
proposal
is
for
a
change
of
use
of
the
land
to
a
dog
exercise
area
with
associated
fencing.
D
The
proposal
is
for
dogs
with
behavior
issues
or
dogs
that
are
more
timid
and
suffer
from
anxiety
and
also
dogs.
That
would
be
would
be
trained
in
an
exercise
area
in
a
secure
environment,
and
that
would
take
place
both
in
a
paddock
area,
which
is
this
area
here
to
the
north
of
the
buildings
and
the
more
wooded
area.
D
D
Since
then,
the
applicant
has
given
consideration
to
the
matters
set
out
by
members
and
has
agreed
to
a
number
of
amendments
if
you
like
or
conditions,
and
those
would
be
to
limit
the
number
of
dogs
on
site
at
any
one
time
to
reduce
the
hours,
particularly
during
the
winter
months,
to
provide
acoustic
fencing
along
the
boundary
with
number
28
clara
drive.
D
They
also
confirmed
that
no
external
lighting
would
be
proposed
as
part
of
the
development
that
an
all-weather
parking
space
would
be
provided,
but
they
also
could
not
agree
the
removal
of
the
woodland
from
the
proposal
that
forms
an
integral
part
of
their
scheme.
D
So,
in
terms
of
what
environmental
health
have
said,
it's
not
that
common
for
what
it's
very
uncommon,
very
common
for
environmental
health
departments
to
receive
complaints
regarding
barking
dogs
due
to
the
perceived
loudness
and
implant
implementing
mitigation
measures
to
reduce
noise
can
be
quite
challenging.
D
Environmental
health
recognized
that
there
is
no
recognized
international
or
british
standard
that
recognizes
an
assessment
methodology
for
dog
barking.
However,
they
looked
at
the
the
objectives,
noise,
impact
assessments
and
agreed
with
the
conclusions
that
they
reach
in
terms
of
the
methodology
of
how
they've
compiled
the
data
and
the
mitigation
measures
that
could
potentially
be
be
assessed.
D
D
The
report
also
alluded
to
a
number
of
factors
which
would
contribute
to
loss
of
immunity,
including
the
duration,
frequency
of
barking,
which
remain
unknown.
However,
leaving
dogs
in
external
areas
will
generate.
Noise
commented
the
environmental
health
officer
which
would
be
difficult
to
avoid,
therefore,
leaving
residents
the
only
option
of
avoiding
noise
by
leaving
their
property.
D
However,
officers
have
fully
assessed
the
proposal
in
terms
of
policy
n33
and
also
the
mppf
and
officers.
Consider
it
not
to
be
inappropriate
development.
It
preserves
the
openness
of
the
green
belt
and
therefore
it
is
an
acceptable
use.
So,
on
that
basis,
the
impact
on
the
green
belt
does
not
form
a
reason
for
refusal.
However,
there
is
a
reason
for
refusal
based
upon
the
impact
on
local
residents,
and
on
that
basis
the
recommendation
is
for
refusal.
Thank
you,
chair.
C
Thank
you
right,
we'll
do
questions
for
officers
after
we've
had
speakers.
I
just
want
to
bring
in
mr
butler
at
this
point
to
explain
why
there
are
speaking
rights.
B
Chair,
thank
you.
Members
will
recall
that
the
previous
recommendation
was
for
approval,
but
the
chair
has
exercised
his
right
to
extend
the
speaking
rights
on
this
item
following
the
receipt
of
the
environmental
health
officer's
consultation
response,
which
triggered
a
refu
reversal
of
the
previous
recommendation
presented
to
panel
and
as
adam's
just
explained,
it's
now
for
refusal,
so
I
thought
it
was
appropriate
to
to
extend
the
rights
for
that
reason.
L
C
My
apologies
was
good.
Also,
you've
got
four
minutes
from
whenever
you
you
want
you're,
ready
to
start.
L
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
I
understand,
but
I'm
slightly
disappointed
by
the
recommendation.
That's
for
our
application,
which
has
been
declined
solely
as
a
result
of
a
noise
report
which
was
submitted
by
the
objectors.
L
The
report
does
not
take
into
consideration
the
hedges
and
trees
between
our
property
and
28,
clara
drive
or
the
coach
house
which
we
also
proposed
adding
to
and
which
will
help
to
baffle
the
sound.
The
report
does
not
mention
the
installation
of
acoustic
fencing,
which
was
suggested
at
the
panel
on
the
17th
of
february.
L
However,
the
report
from
the
objectives
does
suggest
that
planning
permission
should
be
declined
unless
detailed
noise
impact
assessment
and
approved
mitigation
measures
are
implemented
through
conditions.
So
surely
that
means
I
should
be
given
the
opportunity
to
set
up
and
trial
mitigation
measures
and
with
respect
the
eho
report
seems
a
little
bit
weak
and
done
the
bare
minimum.
It
doesn't
contest
the
submitted
noise
report
in
any
way,
but
simply
rehashes
it
with
no
original
information
or
data.
L
L
In
reality,
it's
highly
unlikely
that
we'll
be
booked
up
all
day
every
day,
the
figure
of
eight
dogs
during
a
short
period
of
the
day
was
included
simply
to
allow
professional,
walkers
or
trainers
to
use
the
field,
but
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
they
will
looking
at
similar
facilities.
The
majority
of
users
tend
to
be
individuals
with
their
own
one
or
two
dogs,
and
the
field
will
be
rented
by
the
hour,
not
per
dog,
so
there's
no
benefit
to
me
in
encouraging
larger
groups.
L
L
C
Thank
you
very
much
for
that.
Do
members
have
questions.
F
Can
I
just
ask
you,
will
there
be
dogs
staying
overnight?
No,
thank
you.
C
I
was
gonna.
Ask
that
self
same
question
myself.
Do
you
have
any
further
questions
for
our
speaker
looking
around
nope
in
that
case?
Thank
you
very
much,
okay,
sort
of
a
moment
for
people
to
step
back
and
then
application.
Mr
dahan,
thank
you
very
much.
You've
got
four
minutes
from
whenever
you're
comfortable.
G
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
address
the
committee
after
we
last
met
and
in
order
to
satisfy
the
environmental
impact
with
regards
to
noise
pollution
of
the
proposed
development,
the
residents
of
chloro
drive
undertook
a
comprehensive
noise
impact
assessment.
I
would
like
to
refer
to
this
now.
The
national
planning
policy
framework
states
that
planning
policies
and
decisions
should
aim
to
avoid
noise
from
giving
rise
to
significant
adverse
impacts
on
health
and
quality
of
life
as
a
result
of
a
new
development.
G
The
assessment
replicated
the
sounds
of
dogs
barking
and
measured
the
noise
impact
at
one
metre,
3,
5,
10
and
20
meters.
This
was
done
twice
both
at
my
house
and
the
opposite
house
to
the
proposed
development,
the
coach
house
both
times
each
measurement
breach
the
national
guidelines
for
noise
pollution.
The
world
health
organization
recommend
a
maximum
internal
noise
criteria
of
35
decibels
and,
as
the
report
shows,
readings
were
measured
way
in
excess
of
this
planning.
G
Practice
guidance
states
that
there
is
a
high
risk
of
significant
adverse
health
impact,
unable
to
use
garden
and
immunity
space
or
have
windows
open
for
ventilation
and,
as
the
environmental
health
officer
now
states.
In
his
report,
the
sound
emitted
from
this
before
development
cannot
be
mitigated,
thus
resulting
in
negative
health
repercussions
and
a
loss
of
living
amenity
to
date.
There
are
only
four
comments
of
support
from
carverly
community
for
this
development,
but
55
objections
from
the
locale.
This
proposal
is
not
supported
by
the
local
community.
G
We
requested
the
committee
to
follow
the
advice
and
recommendation
provided
by
the
planning
officer
and
to
reject
the
application.
We
all
recognise
the
importance
of
the
public
role.
A
committee
performs
that
public
role
is
encapsulated
in
the
leads
council
code
of
conduct
that
applies
to
all
councillors
and
voting
co-opted
members
of
the
council
when
they're
acting
in
their
official
capacity.
G
G
You
must
make
decisions
based
on
the
information
before
you
having
had
regard
to
any
professional
advice
provided
to
you
and
in
accordance
with
the
view
of
the
public
interest
decisions
on
merit.
This
includes
making
appointments,
awarding
contracts
or
recommendations
for
the
paragraph.
Five
of
the
code
refers
to.
Openness
must
be
as
open
as
possible
by
your
actions
and
those
of
the
authority
and
should
prepare
to
give
reasons
for
those
actions
we
submitted.
G
There
is
no
evidence
that
contradicts
any
of
the
above.
The
public
interest
is
discharged
by
following
the
planning
office's
advice
and
taking
full
account
of
the
harm
to
the
living
conditions
of
clara
drive
residents
through
noise
and
disturbance
from
barking
dogs.
We
hope
that
the
planning
office's
recommendations
to
refuse
this
application
are
acted
upon
and
request
that
the
committee
provides
full
reasons
for
this
decision.
Should
this
not
be
the
case
as
an
as
an
add-on?
After
listening
to
the
applicant's
words,
this
has
also
caused
a
lot
of
stress
from
for
me
and
my
family.
G
We
are
both
nhs
workers.
We
work
long
shifts.
Our
neighbor
is
an
nhs
worker
and
post
a
pandemic
when
we
have
felt
absolutely
under
the
cosh
and
done
as
much
as
we
can.
All
we
want
to
do
is
come
home
and
enjoy
the
amenity
of
a
house
that
we
have
moved
into
and
enjoy
the
quiet
residential
space
that
we
feel
we're
entitled
to.
This
is
extraordinarily
stressful
for
all
parties
concerned.
None
of
this
is
personal.
We
simply
want
to
do
what
we
think
is
correct.
What
the
law
says
should
be
done
and
enjoy
the
quiet.
G
C
G
They
were
measured,
so
we
the
no
and
it
was
an
independent
person
that
did
it.
It's
not.
Yes,
we
paid
for
the
report,
but
it
is,
it
is
a
contractor
who
has
worked
for
leads.
The
accountant
submitted
many
reports
to
lead
city
council
which
have
been
accepted.
We
did
not
choose
somebody
whose
credentials
would
be
in
question
they
replicated
the
noise
replicated
by
what
dogs
would
make
and-
and
the
report
is,
as
is,
which
suggests
that
it
clearly
shows
that
there
would
be
a
breach
of
the
environmental
health
officers,
recommendations.
C
And
I
think
I
think
my
question
is
more:
actually:
where
were
the
noi?
Where
were
the
noises
from
dogs?
Where
would
they
measure
where
were
they
taken
from?
Would
it
was
it
a
similar
type
of
facility
yeah?
Was
it
sample
noises?
Was
it
a
general
noise
bank
of
dog
noises
to
an
accredited
standard?
I'm
just
wanting
some
clarity
for
probably
helping
myself
and
panel
members
yeah.
So
it
was.
G
They
replicated
the
I
mean
it
was
a
technical
probe
which
replicated
the
noise
that
a
dog
barker
emits
which
those
evidence
suggests
what
that
is,
and
then
they
moved
around
the
area
that
the
the
applicant
wants
to
once
open
and
measure
the
sound
in
my
house
at
numerous
locations
at
my
house
and
steve's
house
opposite,
and
they
measured
the
noise
assessment
of
of
of
of
the
of
what
they
perceived
to
be
dogs,
parking.
C
C
K
Then
perhaps
counselor
understand
that
the
matter
can
be
concluded
and
then
you
can
make
that
comment
which
can
be
minuted
and
then
shared
with
the
appropriate
plans.
Panel
or
committee.
C
That's
yeah
entirely
reasonable,
so
we
have
recommendations
in
front
of
us
now.
Obviously
I
wasn't
here
for
the
I
wasn't
cheering.
I
wasn't
remember
the
panel
for
the
first
time
that
came
before
us
and
it
was
recommended
for
approval
at
that
point
whether
it
was
deferred
again
and
the
the
noise
reports
that
we've
discussed
this
afternoon
and
that's
changed
the
recommendations
to
refusal.
Now
the
refusal
appears
to
be
wholly
based
on
that
noise
report.
C
Perhaps
just
from
the
chair
as
a
means
to
be
helpful.
I
don't
have
a
dog
in
this
hunt.
If
you
pardon
the
expression,
we
could
look
to
perhaps
change
the
recommendations,
perhaps
to
a
temporary
approval
for
a
year
to
see
how
things
go.
This
is
these
facilities
come
along
very,
very,
very
rarely
and
it
would
be
environmental
health
colleagues
that
would
have
to
monitor
it
for
a
year
and
then
the
position,
the
permission
could
be
revoked.
That's
an
option
to
us,
but
the
first
part
of
call
colleagues.
A
C
K
Right,
okay,
so
we
have
got
council
anderson
who
has
moved
the
officer
recommendation
chair.
You
have
put
forward
an
alternative
and
you've
amended.
The
officer
recommendation
and
councillor
has
seconded
that.
Therefore,
that
gets
voted
on
first
and
then
we
go.
But
if
that
falls
we
go
back
to
the
original.
C
E
Thank
you
chair
what
I
I
understand,
your
reasoning
for
the
amendment.
I
just
wonder
if
we
are
put
in
the
applicant
to
unnecessary
cost,
should
it
fail,
because,
in
order
for
it
to
to
work,
they
would
still
need
to
carry
out
their
acoustic,
fencing
and
planting
etc.
C
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from,
but
I
don't
think
that's
a
material
consideration.
The
applicants
because
they're
putting
the
fold
they're
taking
the
risk
as
it
were,
we're
putting
the
application
forward.
I
mean
the
first
thing
they
would
clearly
well.
They
would
obviously
have
some
if
they
gained
permission
full
permission
for
today
would
they
would
still
have
to
undertake
those
works
so
for
a
year
I
that
would
be
entirely
up
to
them.
C
I
suppose
what
I
put
as
a
suggestion
is
actually
an
amendment
and
a
recommendation
as
nikki
sent
out
so
and
council
reagan
seconded
it.
So
can
we
just
come
into
you
for
a
second.
B
Situations
often
do
get
a
little
bit
confusing,
but
just
for
absolute
clarity,
so,
what's
on
the
table,
is
a
12
month
temporary
permission
to
give
the
opportunity
to
monitor
any
complaints.
So
in
the
original
in
the
report,
you've
got
in
front
of
it.
It
has
the
original
conditions
of
the
first
report.
So
all
those
would
be
extend
for
that
12-month
period,
including
the
acoustic
fencing,
which
is
the
risk
for
the
applicants.
B
In
terms
of
that,
and
of
course,
if
members
were
to
to
approve
that,
so
it's
for
12-month
temporary,
which
time
it
would
cease
unless
they
came
back
and
actually
we
renewed
it
because
we
had
another
report
that
was
saying
there
were
no
further
concerns
or
concerns
of
not
any
real
relevance.
So
that's
how
it
would
fall,
but
that
is
at
the
risk
of
the
applicant
as
to
whether
they
then
take
up
that
suggested
permission.
C
C
Three
against
any
abstentions:
okay,
so
that
that's
carried
then
so,
that's
a
12-month
temporary
permission
with
the
full
set
of
conditions
that
would
have
applied
to
a
permanent
permanent
permission
right.
Okay,
that's
the
item
closed
away,
then,
thank
you
very
much
folks
for
attending.
Oh
and
then
council.
Yes,
sorry.
J
I
was
going
to
say
is
we've
on
this
occasion
we
had
information
brought
to
us
because
the
residents
were
able
to
afford
to
get
this
study
done
now.
If,
if
at
that
meeting,
we
had
approved
it,
we
wouldn't
have
had
some
of
these
consideration
right.
So
what
I'm
asking
is?
Can
we
get
a
paper
taken
to
the
joint
plans
panel
or
development
plans
panel
as
to
how
we're
going
to
deal
with
situations
like
this
again?
I
accept
that
at
the
time
it
arrived
too
late
for
our
consideration.
J
But
what
do
we
do
so
that
other
people
get
fairness
and
also
how
we
can,
because
I
personally
do
not
understand
the
technicalities
of
the
report
that
we
got
as
to
what's
acceptable
noise
or
what's
not
acceptable
now,
and
I
would
have
thought
the
vast
majority
of
members
would
be
in
the
same
position
as
myself,
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
given
some
training
on
how
to
how
to
take
these
reports
so
that
we
can
put
our
own
weight
on
them.
A
Yes,
thanks
chair,
I
think
the
difficulty
with
this
application
was
the
lack
of
environmental
health
response
initially
to
the
consultation
due
to
the
difficulties
they've
had
in
resourcing
planning
application
responses.
That's
now
being
rectified,
so
I
wouldn't
expect
that
to
be
replicated
in
future
applications
in
that
we
will
get
that
guidance,
specialist
guidance
at
an
early
stage
of
the
proceedings,
which
will
certainly
help
to
avoid
that
type
of
situation.
A
C
C
Nice
one
right:
okay,
so
let's
move
on
to
agenda
item
eight
nook
farm,
jaime
road
tingley,
which
was
subject
to
a
site
visit
this
morning
for
anyone
who
was
able
to
come
to
the
site
visits.
It
is
an
extremely
pleasant
spot
and
I
recommend
visiting
if
people
haven't
already
and
I'm.
C
I
do
apologize,
it
is
beautiful.
I'm
I'm
thinking
of
the
one
in
adult.
I
do
apologize.
I've
turned
too
many
pages
over
counselor
anderson
in
my
defense
is
it's
three
years
since
I
chaired
the
plans
panel,
I'm
having
flashbacks
to
the
north
and
east
as
we
speak,
so
we're
just
setting
ourselves
up
for
actually
properly
agenda.
Item
8,
which
is
yeah,
should.
M
Thank
you
chair.
The
application
brought
before
members
to
plans
panel
relates
to
reserve
matters,
application
with
the
erection
of
289
dwine
houses
on
four
parcels
of
land
set
to
the
north
and
south
of
hague.
Woods
in
west
hardly
yep.
M
The
wording
of
the
recommendation
is
phase
appraised
to
enable
the
application
to
be
deferred
and
delegated
to
the
chief
planning
officer,
subject
to
the
expiration
of
the
publicity
period
and
no
new
material
considerations
being
raised
should
be
noted
that
the
additional
information
has
not
changed.
The
proposal,
certainly
not
to
the
detriment
of
neighbouring
properties,
I.e,
citing
them
closer
or
making
them
higher,
etc.
And
therefore
such
information
would
not
be
required
by
the
statement
of
community
involvement,
further
publicize
to
give
update
and
a
bit
of
housekeeping
just
a
couple
of
points.
M
M
Since
the
resolute
resolution
was
made
at
the
pans
panel,
one
further
representation
has
been
received
from
local
resident.
The
points
raised
do
not
raise
any
new
material
considerations
and
relate
in
the
main
to
their
specific
boundary
and
the
impact
of
the
development
upon
their
amenity
following
an
email
that
was
sent
to
all
moy
and
artly,
and
robin
hood
ward
members
informing
them
of
the
receipt
with
the
additional
information
one
email
has
been
received
from
councillor
finnegan,
which
outlined
concerns
that
the
information
does
not
go
far
enough
to
address
members
concerns.
M
This
then
confirmed
that
it
was
sent
on
behalf
of
the
maui
southward
members.
Following
this
email
objections
were
received
from
councillors,
newton
senior
and
kidja.
The
objection
emails
again
raised
no
new
material
considerations.
M
As
of
this
morning,
a
further
email
has
been
received
from
councilman
herron,
saying
that
she
hadn't
received
the
the
email
this
was.
I
can
confirm
this
was
sent
to
all
members
on
the
23rd
of
the
fifth
and
it
was
sent
to
councillor
foster
council,
mulheran
and
councillor
renshaw
separately
to
the
morley
ward
members,
but
it
was
sent
on
the
same
day
and
it
was
the
same
email.
M
Again
again,
this
is
doesn't
raise
any
new
material
considerations
and
all
the
issues
have
been
addressed
in
the
outlying
application,
as
well
as
the
original
reserve
matters
chief
planning
officer's
report,
it
is
noted
so
going
on
to
the
actual
appraisal
and
taking
each
point
of
the
resolution.
In
turn,
members
will
recall
that
concerns
were
raised
regarding
the
mixture
of
house
types
and
sizes,
together
with
a
mixture
of
house
sizes
offered
for
affordable
housing
contribution
across
the
site.
M
The
incorporation
of
the
bungalows
across
the
site
increases
the
provision
of
two
bed
units
within
the
housing
mix,
and
accordingly,
it
is
considered
that
the
information
that
has
been
provided.
The
clarity
that's
been
provided
from
local
planning
officers
is
is
that
this
is
an
acceptable
schemes
compliant
fully
compliant
with
core
strategy
policies,
h4
and
h5.
M
The
applicant
has
looked
at
the
landscaping
across
the
site
in
significant
detail,
and
a
package
of
information
shows
the
quality
of
individual
and
group
trees
and
further
landscaping
improvements
that
to
be
undertaken.
The
information
also
outlines
the
trees
that
to
be
removed
due
to
health
reasons.
M
The
strategy
of
the
overall
landscaping
is
considered
to
be
of
significant
benefit
benefit
to
the
ecology
and
the
biodiversity
of
the
overall
site
and
any
trees
lost
are
sufficiently
mitigated
against
with
further
landscaping
provisions
and
enhancements
relation
to
the
specific
concerns
regarding
the
trees
at
the
entrance
to
upper
green
avenue.
The
applicant
has
further
looked
at
these
trees
and
it
is
proposed
to
retain
tree
that
is
labeled
t66.
M
M
Unfortunately,
there
is
no
other
options
available
to
provide
access
into
this
part
of
the
site.
However,
in
assessing
the
overall
impact
of
the
proposal
upon
the
existing
landscape,
notably,
it
is
stressed
that
the
proposal
does
facilitate
long-term
improvements
to
the
ancient
wonderland
and
the
large
group
of
existing
trees
around
the
site.
That
would
otherwise
not
be
managed
in
an
effective
way.
The
site
as
a
whole
retains
the
vast
majority
of
existing
trees
and
hedgerows
and
will
landscape
the
development
to
mitigate
any
losses
sufficiently
enough
to
come.
M
The
original
report
members
sought
to
address
the
issues
of
design
in
relation
to
the
scale,
layout,
appearance
and
landscaping
of
the
site
members
raised
concerns
regarding
general
street
designs
and
the
overall
approach
and
connectivity
of
the
scheme
and
also
questioned
whether
renewable
energy
sources,
such
as
solar
panels,
could
be
incorporated.
M
Proposal
is
relatively
unique
in
so
far
as
proposals.
Four
parcels
of
land
that
have
been
proposed
to
be
comprehensively
developed
to
ensure
the
ancient
woodland
and
areas
around
there
can
be
landscaped,
managed
and
enhanced,
and,
furthermore,
made
accessible
to
the
wider
community
through
new
public
rights
of
way.
M
The
proposed
development
has
been
laid
out
to
ensure
that
topography
of
the
scientists,
utilize
and
development
reflects
the
characteristics
of
the
sounding
area.
The
house
types
and
sizes
are
reflective
of
the
wider
areas
they
sit
in
and
all
parcels
of
land,
utilize
views
and
vistas
of
ancient
woodlands
that
sit
centrally
within
them.
The
design
reflects
the
surrounding
areas
character
where
possible,
such
as
the
new
bungalows
proposed
are
set
close
to
the
already
existing
bungalows
and
the
house
types
and
sizes
reflect
on
all
parcels.
M
The
open
spaces
and
landscaping
are
considered
to
build
upon
the
existing
green
infrastructure
used
by
the
existing
community.
The
open
spaces
and
layouts
of
the
site
provide
legible
and
logical
routes
through
the
site
and
are
inviting
to
the
wider
residential
communities
through
the
opening
up
for
the
woodlands
and
new
connectivity
through
new
public
rights
of
way.
The
boundary
treatment
plan
has
submitted,
which
further
demonstrates
that
the
spaces
are
to
be
defined
and
treated
in
a
way
that
enhances
legibility
through
the
site
and
defines
and
places
and
makes
this
place.
M
The
proposed
layout
shows
a
strong
hierarchy
of
streets
which
accommodate
various
types
of
movement
in
a
convenient
and
safe
manner.
The
approach
enables
good
navigation
through
the
site,
but
also
enables
the
users
to
understand
the
transition
between
roads,
where
the
motor
vehicles
may
be
more
dominant
than
roads
that
primarily
a
residential
street.
M
The
master
plan
was,
although
indicative
at
the
outline
stage
and
provided
us
through
the
site
allocation
plan,
always
indic,
indicative,
as
it
may
have
been,
did
mean
that
the
streets
design
guide
had
been
given
due
consideration
at
all
those
stages.
M
Cyclone
pedestrian
links,
reserve
matters
proposal
enhances
the
existing
put
footpath
connections
with
surface
upgrades
and
sense
is
sensitively
designed,
which
immeasurably
improves
the
pedestrian
connectivity
of
the
site
as
a
whole.
M
20
mile,
an
hour,
speed
limits
in
the
development
parcels
will
run,
render
shared
use
of
the
proposed
highways
safe
for
cyclists
and
motorists,
and
the
balance
of
providing
good
public
rights
of
way
and
minimizing.
The
impact
of
the
paths
upon
the
wider
ecology
of
the
site
are
considered
to
be
an
ex
acceptable
in
in
terms
of
all
planning
policies.
M
M
The
density
of
the
housing
enables
efficient
use
of
the
allocated
site,
whilst
the
housing,
design
and
layout
facilitates
good
residential
and
visual
amenity.
It's
considered
that
the
applicant
has
sufficiently
addressed
the
concerns
raised
by
members
and
the
proposal
is
fully
policy
compliant
as
such.
The
recommendation
as
it
was
in
say,
the
plans
panel
of
the
14th
of
april
is
recommending
approval
subject
to
conditions.
C
M
For
the
new
members,
the
four
four
parcels
of
of
land
for
development
straddle
the
the
ancient
woodland
which
is
in
the
applicant's
control,
but
it
doesn't
form
any
physical
development.
The
enhancements
include
new
footpaths
that
will
link
wider
residential
areas
into
the
woodlands.
M
In
terms
of
the
points
that
were
raised
and
the
reasons
for
deferral,
a
key.
The
the
applicant
of
note
is
key
that
four
bungalows
have
been
provided
at
members
requests
which
are
to
be
located
on
this
parcel
of
land,
which
is
next
to
existing
bungalows.
M
M
They've
included
agricultural
assessment
details
for
across
the
site
and
whilst
the
these
trees
have
have,
unfortunately,
and
regrettably
have
to
go,
it
is
it
as
outlined
in
my
reports
and
then
the
chief
planning
officer's
report,
the
the
access
has
been
approved
at
outline
and
it
the
indicative
master
plans,
have
always
seen
this
to
be
a
winnie,
a
development
in
in
that
parcel
of
land.
C
I
I
So
the
chief
legal
officer,
taking
into
account
we've
just
heard
about
speaking
right,
the
previous
application.
Why
was
the
legal
advice
in
this
particular
case
to
exclude
the
community
from
being
able
to
comment
on
what
has
been
a
controversial
application
and
they
were
excluded
from
being
able
to
address
this
particular
panel
with
the
significant
concerns
that
they
raised?
I'd
like
to
understand
that
the
legal
process
that
led
to
that
refusal
in
terms
of
the
highways
officer
we're
looking
at
parcel
a
at
this
particular
point.
I
This
doesn't
comply
with
that
does
it
second
question
could
follow
up
if
the
highways
officer
wants
to
respond
to
that
one
in
terms
of
the
planning
officer,
I'm
particularly
interested
in
policy
age,
four,
which
is
about
housing
mix.
We
had
a
big
and
very
contentious
discussion
last
time
about
her
housing
mix
and
by
and
large,
very
little
has
changed.
I
We've
been
up
at
one
percent
bungalows,
even
though
we
had
significant
concerns
last
time,
but
in
terms
of
the
obligations
under
h4,
which
talks
about
developers
should
submit
a
housing
needs
assessment
addressing
all
10
years,
so
that
the
needs
of
the
locality
can
be
taken
into
account
at
the
time
of
development.
So
now,
why
are
you
using
the
same
assessment?
I
That
is
the
smart
assessment,
which
is
now
five
years
out
of
date,
and
why
wasn't
the
housing
manager
consulted
on
local
housing
need,
because
he's
confirmed
as
of
this
morning
that
nobody
from
planning
has
been
in
touch
with
him
whatsoever
to
talk
about
local
housing
need
how
can
policy
h4
be
complied
with
at
the
point
where
you're
using
details
and
figures
that
are
five
years
out
of
date?
And
you
don't
talk
to
the
housing
manager
thanks,
chet.
C
K
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you
councillor,
finn
again,
I'm
aware
that
there
have
been
some
requests
to
engage
further
speaking
rights.
It's
a
matter
of
public
record
that
the
residents
who
registered
their
request
to
speak
did
so
at
the
last
plans
panel
and
which
was
subsequently
deferred.
K
Now,
the
the
information
here
before
you
is
the
same
material
considerations
which
members
required
further
information
from
officers
to
go
away
and
get
that
information,
so
that
you
could
further
consider
and
make
a
proper
planning
decision
on
this
matter.
So,
in
accordance
with
that
protocol,
the
legal
advice
is
clear
that
there
are
no
new,
significant
information
that
arises
they're
within
the
scope
of
the
same
material
consideration,
and
that
is
a
report
before
you
and
therefore
further
public
speaking
rights
are
not
triggered.
Thank
you,
chair.
A
Hello,
when
you
say
it
doesn't
comply
with
3.25
that
refers
to
the
table,
which
has
got
lots
of
different
things
in
there.
Having
read
the
the
work
submission,
I
am
presuming
that
you
relate
you're
referring
to
the
length
of
cul-de-sac.
I'm
I'm
a
right
in
that
one.
I
For
people
we
do
apologize,
yeah
the
paragraph
that
we're
debating
50
to
200
dwellings.
This
is
their
design
guy
call.
This
action
should
be
avoided
where
possible.
Well,
they
haven't
been
clearly
and
they
should
have
a
maximum
length
of
200
meters
they're
more
than
200
meters
long.
So
it
must
be
a
breech.
C
I
A
Sorry,
firstly,
with
regards
to
cause
the
site:
you
you're
right
and
it
says,
avoid
where
possible.
In
this
case,
they
they've
decided
that
it's
not
not
impossible
to
to
avoid
that
or
it's
not
possible
to
avoid
it
because
of
the
shape
of
the
site.
A
So
then,
with
regards
to
the
length,
I'm
aware
that
wagov
suggested
that
the
the
distance
from
from
the
main
road
down
to
the
site,
the
proposed
site
access
is
more
than
200
meters,
which
perhaps
it
may
be.
But
in
this
case
the
the
access
in
that
location
has
already
been
approved.
I
C
I
think
the
officer
was
clearing
that
is
to
be
avoided
where
possible.
There
is
a
little
bit
of
discretion
in
this,
but
obviously
cul-de-sacs
over
a
certain
length
had
to
be
avoided,
but
it
is
where
possible
so
saying
it's
a
breach
is
catchy
an
inflammatory
language,
a
granule,
but
it's
not
actually
accurate.
In
this
case
now
mark
you
want
to
come
back
in.
M
In
terms
of
this
particular
issue,
the
sites
were
adopted
and
went
through
significant
scrutiny
at
the
site
allocation
plan.
The
outline
app
when
the
site
was
allocated.
As
you
can
see,
the
irregular
nature
of
of
the
site
has
already
been
approved
by
the
planning
inspector,
and
we
have
adopted
the
this
site
allocation
plan.
M
The
access
was
then
approved
at
outline
stage.
At
all
these
points,
it's
been
understood.
The
the
design
guidance-
and
I
stress
guidance,
has
been
there
in
terms
of
what
we
have
has
always
been
indicated
and
by
and
has
been
accepted
by
by
virtue
of
the
outline
application
that
approved
the
access
in
terms
of
highway
safety.
M
The
the
if
you,
if
I
point
out
on
the
the
way
that
adoptions
will
work
it.
It
ends
up
being
those
different
sections
of
of
of
materials
to
be
used
to
slow
down
traffic,
to
ensure
that
there's
a
legibility
and
that
people
can
understand
the
different
areas
where
cars
are
going
to
be
dominant
or
where
it's
more
likely
to
pedestrian.
So
in
terms
of
highway
safety.
M
Yep,
let's
go
so
on
the
h4
and
the
housing
mix
in
terms
of
the
policy
the
there
is,
there
is
no.
There
is
no
requirement
to
include
bungalows,
and
these
have
been
offered
up
with
good
faith
by
the
applicant
in
terms
of
the
the
housing
needs
assessment.
M
M
But
what
I
should
just
point
out
is
that
the
policy
requirements
for
the
housing
mix
says
that
housing
needs
assessment
should
be
submitted
by
the
applicant
which
they
have
done
using
the
evidence
base
of
the
shmar.
Whilst
that
might
be
out
outdated
or
maybe
of
five
years
old.
That
is
the
evidence
base
that
is,
is
required
to
to
do.
M
The
housing
needs
assessment
in
terms
of
the
looking
at
a
waiting
list
for
the
affordable
housing,
as
it's
outlined
in
in
the
chief
planning
officers
report,
the
they're
using
the
schma
and
looking
at
what
is
required
on
the
waiting
list
and
what
is
confirmed
by
the
registered
social
landlord.
M
G
Hi
good
afternoon,
so,
regarding
the
shmar,
it
was
it's
used
as
part
of
the
core
strategy
selected
review
evidence
in
2019
and
it's
intended
to
provide
evidence
over
a
planned
period.
So
several
years
it's
the
latest
evidence
we
use
to
assess
and
implement
policy
h4
on
applications.
A
J
J
What
did
the
applicant
say
when
you
ask
them
for
more
bungalows,
rather
than
the
ones
they've
offered
up,
because
there
was
a
definite
feeling
from
a
number
of
us
the
last
time
we
wanted
more,
so
you
would
have
been
going
into
that
negotiation
needing
to
meet
the
needs
of
the
plants
panel,
which
was
to
request
more
and
so
why?
J
What
arguments
did
the
applicants
give
to
you
as
to
why
they
couldn't
meet
the
needs
of
what
we're
doing
in
respect
of
point
three:
it's
something
that
I
go
on
around
about
all
the
time
and
counselor
finnegan
does
as
well
we're
talking
about
carbon
capture.
Here
we
made
it
very
clear
at
the
last
meeting
that
we
have
a
climate
emergency
that
we've
declared.
We
want
to
know
from
planners
how
much
carbon
is
being
expended
in
these
sites
now
and
what
the
effect
is.
There
are
tools
available.
J
So
it's
not
that
the
tools
aren't
available.
If
you
want
to
use
the
tools
go
to
leads
university,
they
will
free
start
giving
them,
as
will
the
lga
give
you
tools
to
calculate
this.
Why
has
that
not
been
brought
back
to
answer
the
third
point,
which
was
to
include
the
quality
of
trees
and
detail
regarding
carbon
capture,
so
that
we
know
what's
going
to
happen
now
again
from
a
a
tree
perspective.
J
J
Why
is
that
not
being
possible
here,
particularly
on
the
tree,
that
counselor
hamilton
raised
the
last
time
as
well,
because
that
was
something
that
there
was
broad
consensus
on
at
the
last
meeting,
cancer
hamilton
raised
the
issue
about
the
tree.
What's
the?
What
is
the
asset
value
of
that
tree?
Why
is
that
not
here
justifying
and
explaining
what
the
position
is,
because
these
are
the
things
that
we're
discussing
when
we're
discussing
the
climate
emergency?
J
Why
are
we
as
a
plans
panel
not
discussing
those?
Because
we
think
these
are?
You
know
the
whole
raft
of
other
ones,
because
when
it
comes
to
the
housing
needs
assessment?
Why
must?
Why?
Can
the
applicant
not
be
asked
to
provide
an
up-to-date
assessment,
an
up-to-date
assessment,
because,
for
example,
I
can
only
talk
about
my
own
word?
The
housing
needs
assessment
was
done
about
seven
or
eight
years
ago.
J
J
I
mean
you
can't
honestly
say
that
you
are
meeting
the
needs
of
the
public
because,
as
councillor
finnegan
has
pointed
out,
you're
not
because
if
you
ask
a
local
housing
manager,
local
housing
manager
will
tell
you
where
the
shortages
of
housing
are
so.
We've
got
good
qualified
officers
in
housing
and
we
don't
appear
to
be
listening
to
them.
Why
not?
Why
are
we
ignoring
our
own
officer's
advice?
J
You
know,
it
just
seems
peculiar
in
terms
of
life
and
the
final
thing
is,
we
did
ask
at
the
last
meeting
to
have
the
outline
conditions
appended
to
this
report.
Why
are
they
not
here?
Because
we
keep
being
told
that
this
is,
and
I
accept
this
outline
has
been
approved,
but
nobody
knows
what
the
outline
conditions
were,
and
a
number
of
us
would
like
to
know
what
was
actually
agreed
now
why
those
weren't
furnished
in
this
report,
we
might,
we
might
have
found
them
a
bit
irrelevant,
but
why
not.
J
B
C
M
Of
the
conditions,
so
all
the
conditions
are
still
relevant
in
terms
of
the
officers
report
for
the
outline
consent
is
in
the
appendix,
together
with
the
decision
notice,
to
show
exactly
what
the
wording
of
the
conditions
are.
No
conditions
have
been
discharged
at
this
moment
in
time,
so
all
the
details
will
will
have
to
be
discharged
following
the
determination
of
this
application.
J
So
my
argument
is:
how
do
we
as
a
panel
know
that
the
applicants
are
going
to
abide
by
these,
because
we
we
keep
raising
issues
and
we
create
correctly
being
advised
by
officers
that,
because
it
was
agreed
outline,
we
can't
discuss
it,
and
I
agree
with
that.
I
actually
agree
totally
with
that,
but
there
are
a
number
of
joined
up
things
that
need
to
be
dealt
with
outline
and
there
are
things
that
are
coming
along
now
that
interact
with
each
other.
J
In
terms
of
in
terms
of
your
maths,
when
you're
used
to
your
venn
diagrams,
you've
got
all
the
conditions
together.
You've
got
some
that
are
relevant
to
non-reserve
matters
and
some
that
overlap
with
reserve
matters
and
there's
the
bit
in
the
middle
that
cover
both.
That's
the
bit
I'm
talking
about.
How
do
we
as
a
panel
get
that?
Because
we've
got
to
explain
back
to
residents?
That's
the
problem
today.
It's
not
so
much
us
making
the
decision.
It's.
J
B
We
were
asked
to
provide
the
conditions
from
the
previous
outline
application,
because
members
were
a
little
bit
concerned
or
slightly
confused,
perhaps
about
the
fact
that
the
original
application
was
determined
at
city
and
strategic
panel,
which
is
for
the
general
outline.
Yet
the
reserve
matters
quite
rightly
because
it
was
a
joint
chairs
decision
to
bring
back
the
more
detailed
reserve
matters
to
this
panel.
So
at
page
134
for
the
next
five
or
six
pages,
you
have
all
30
conditions
in
full,
which
one
has
to
assume
the
members
have
read.
B
Therefore,
I'm
not
sure
what
I
can
add
to
that
particular
comment.
But
but
if
I
can
just
finish
on
the
other
part
about,
how
can
we
be
sure
that
would
the
conditions
will
be
discharged?
Well
that
that's
just
a
thermal
fairly
normal
day-to-day
activity
and
that
the
conditions
are
there
when
the
applicants
are
a
position,
probably
prior,
because
some
of
these
are
pre,
maybe
pre-commencement
conditions
that
they
will
then
submit
that
information
to
the
city
council.
B
We
will
either
discharge
it
approve
it
or
not,
and
if
then,
the
applicants,
for
whatever
reason
are
in
breach
of
those
conditions.
Then,
of
course
it
becomes
an
enforcement
matter,
so
I
mean
that's,
that's
just
the
norm
for.
J
J
That's
the
problem
that
none
of
those
four
conditions
here
would
stand
a
chance
being
enforced
by
the
council,
because
I
know
from
bitter
experience
that
the
our
officers
will
not
be
able
to
enforce
those
conditions
because
they'll
say
they
weren't
precise
enough.
They
weren't
exact
enough.
So
we've
got
nothing
to
actually
enforce
against
chair.
B
So,
in
addition,
so
what
you've
got
in
effect
is
in
addition
to
the
original
30
conditions,
or
so
is
the
four
that
are
presented
on
page
47
and
the
question
about
how
do
we
know
and
and
those
cannot
be
enforced
against
again,
it's
it's
a
question,
I'm
a
little
bit
surprised
about,
because
actually
it's
the
norm
for
in
terms
of
cutting
down
the
amount
of
information
that
gets
presented
because,
as
you
can
see,
the
panel
pack,
I've
got
here
is
very
thick
for
this
is
that
we
actually
put
the
drafts
heads
of
terms
of
the
conditions
rather
than
the
full
text,
and
we've
brought
back
the
full
text
of
the
reserve
on
the
outline
application,
because
members
specifically
asked
for
that.
C
M
Point
so
taking
your
points
of
starting
points
for
negotiations
on
the
bungalows
and
the
carbon
capture,
it's
important
to
note
that,
in
order
to
go
back
to
an
applicant,
the
starting
point
always
has
to
be
the
planning
policy
and
in
terms
of
the
affordable
in
terms
of
the
bungalows
that
have
been
provided.
There
is
not
a
policy
requirement
to
ask
for
bungalows.
M
So
when
I
went
back
to
the
applicant
we've,
I've
tried
to
look
at
it
and
ask
them:
where
can
they
put
some?
Can
they
accommodate
them
in
in
this,
without
jeopardizing
the
overall
viability
of
of
the
scheme?
They've
offered
four
four
bungalows
that
are
two
bed
which
increases
the
housing
mix
for
the
two
beds.
Also
they're
cited
in
the
location
that
is,
is
close
to
the
existing
bungalows.
M
So
again,
it
improves
the
scheme
in
terms
of
reflecting
the
the
immediate
character
of
of
that
area,
but
the
the
policy
it
was
for
when
the
chief
planning
officer's
recommendation
was
was
put
on
the
agenda.
Previously,
it
was
considered
fully
policy
compliant.
That
is
the
important
part
here,
and
to
go
back
to
them.
They
have
offered
those
bungalows
in
good
faith.
There
was
no
policy
requirement
for
them
to
provide
those
bungalows.
M
So
in
that
respect,
we
have
improved
there's
an
improvement
to
the
scheme,
but
it's
it
has
always.
It
still
remains
that
it
was
policy
compliant
before
likewise
with
the
carbon
capture.
Whilst
if
you,
if
you
can
appreciate
the
size
of
this
site,
the
landscaping
that
is
being
proposed
and
the
improvements
enhancement
to
the
ancient
woodland,
as
well
as
the
landscaping
in
and
around
the
actual
development
side
again,
the
policy
does
not
give
us
the
the
policy
backing
to
insist
on
assessment
of
individual
trees
and
their
ability
to
capture
carbon.
M
C
2022,
the
current-
let's,
let's
be
clear,
the
current
strategic
marketing
assessment
has
been
found
to
be
sound
by
so
many
government
inspectors.
He
could
start
his
own
record
label.
That
is
the
data
set
we're
doing
at
the
mo
we
use
at
the
moment.
That
is
a
legally
sound
set
date,
of
course
anderson.
Just
because
you
don't
like
it,
I
don't
think
it's
up
to
date
doesn't
mean
it
isn't
jermaine
to
this
process.
C
It
is,
we
will
undoubtedly
in
fairly
short
order,
have
the
joys
of
going
through
another
strategic
housing
assessment
for
us,
both
looking
at
sites
and
housing
mixes
in
the
relevant
areas.
That
will
be
forthcoming,
no
doubt
from
forward
planning
colleagues,
but
at
the
moment
we
have
to
use
the
data
that
is
relevant
and
officers
have
used
that
data,
which
is
why
they've
said
on
multiple
equations
in
that
regard.
This
is
policy.
Compliance
reminds
colleagues.
That
planning
is
a
quasi-judicial
process
where
we
use
the
policies
of
the
data.
That
is
sound.
That
is
sound.
C
C
Well,
we
can't
because
that's
not
in
policy
at
the
moment,
but
this
council
is
currently
undertaking
a
climate
emergency
led
local
plan
review,
which
will
give
this
council
I'm
pleased
to
tell
colleagues
absolutely
globally
leading-edge
policies
with
respect
to
the
climate
emergency
in
respect
to
planning.
That's
the
good
news.
The
bad
news
is
statute.
Planning
processes
are
long-winded,
somewhat
clunky,
but
we're
going
through
them
and
we
will
have
those
plans
in
place
as
soon
as
possible.
I
hope
that
clarifies
all
those
matters
who's
got
questions
next.
E
Thank
you.
I
could
just
do
a
little
bit
of
clarity.
If
you
don't
mind,
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
the
trees
at
the
entrance
way
that
we
were
very
concerned
about,
and
we
said
that
the
access
was
decided
outline.
E
M
So
the
description
of
the
outline
planning
application
some.
It
is
part
of
the
the
planning
application
that
outlines
what
the
application
was
for
and
that
addresses
the
five
access
points.
So
when
you're
looking
at
the
permission,
the
the
description
outlines
the
the
accesses
that
that
planning
consent
relates
to
and
then
the
conditions
refer
to,
the
plans
which
show
the
accesses
on
in
plan
form.
E
E
The
the
point
is
really
about
the
trees
it
does.
You
said
we
have
to.
It
said
it's
approved
that
we
could
remove
the
trees
because
of
the
access
that
was
agreed.
The
access
is
saying
it
was
agreed
in
point
three
point:
three
or
condition
three
condition.
Three
doesn't
say
anything
about
the
trees
or
the
access,
that's
what
I'm
confused
about,
and
so
how
do
we
enforce?
That
is.
B
That,
yes,
sorry
yeah,
sorry
councillor
smith,
trying
to
put
it
more
succinctly,
the
outlying
permission,
which
is
not
in
front
of
you
today,
actually
included
the
access
on
a
plan
or
the
accesses
has
been
fixed
and
approved
so
the
point
of
accessing
to
those
sites.
B
They
are
approved
on
the
parcel
of
land
that
you're,
referring
to
partly
and
mark,
will
do
this
better
than
alex.
He
knows
it
better
than
I
once
you
go
into
the
site,
there
are
to
put
topography
issues,
I.e,
slopes
and
it's
very
narrow.
If
that
drawing
could
be
pulled
up
again
or
at
least
a
detailed
drain,
that's
got
the
trees
on
it
that
to
be
removed.
M
B
Yeah,
sorry,
can
I
connect
it?
Yes,
I
do
apologize,
because
it's
not
that
clear
on
here
is
it,
but
so
that
that
was
fixed
at
that
point,
yeah
and
then
you
come
in
and
you
can
see
you've
not
got
a
long
before.
Actually
the
controls
tip
off
down
this,
this
slope
towards
the
the
woodland
which,
of
course,
nobody
wants
to
interfere
with.
B
So
where
do
you
go
at
that
point
if
you're
going
to
actually
access
a
strip
of
land
that
way
which
is
narrow
and
into
this
and
that's
a
significant
slope?
You
have
no
choice
at
that
point,
but
to
actually
spread
to
either
side
and
that's
what's
been
referred
to,
and
unfortunately
that's
the
exact
point
where
the
trees
are
that
we're
talking
about
so
the
applicant's
gone
back
and
had
a
look
at
it
and
with
a
little
bit
of
reconfiguration
that
has
been
retained,
but
the
other
two,
unfortunately,
are
still
lost,
because
you
have
no
choice.
M
And
I
think
it's
just
worth
mentioning
that
for
highway
safety,
we
look
at
having
particular
gradients,
so
the
topography
of
the
land.
When
we're
talking
about
the
gradients
and
the
topography.
That's
why
the
the
length
is
dictated,
so
it
wouldn't
be
a
case
of
just
coming
directing
it
straight
in
it
has
to
meet
gradients
as
well.
C
I
I
Now
colleague,
down
there
in
policy
says
you
don't
need
to
worry
about.
What's
happened
over
the
last
five
years,
because
it's
solid
at
this
particular
point.
We'll
look
at
that
now.
The
bizarre
thing
is:
if
you
look
at
page
58,
you
will
see
that
what
that
tells
us
this
housing
assessment
is
what
we
need
is
31
percent
of
one
bedroom
apartments
in
terms
of
affordable
housing.
I
So
those
people
on
low
income
don't
need
houses,
they
need
one
bedroom
apartments,
31
percent
of
that
or
a
two-bedroom
apartment.
12
of
that
now,
when
you
look
at
the
bigger
houses
for
each
folk,
four-bedroom
and
five-bedroom
detached
amounts
to
42
percent
of
that
actual
site,
so
great
big
houses.
How
many
of
those
are
affordable?
None!
Now?
What
do
we
get
to
try
and
offset
that
we
get
children?
Well
we're
chucking.
I
Who
can
tell
you
what
the
housing
need?
Is
it's
utterly
bizarre.
We're
playing
fantasy
planning
here
h4
is
supposed
to
be
relevant
to
where
we
are
today,
where
we
are
at
this
particular
point,
and
the
housing
mix
is
all
over
the
place.
What
it
does
is
it
basically
says:
well,
it's
just
housing
mix
to
make
sure
that
we
make
loads
of
money
with
four
and
five
bedroom
detached
properties,
but
the
bloody
poor
people
can
have
one
bedroom
apartment,
because
that's
what
it
tells
us
is
what
is
required
in
this
local
area.
I
We
won't
bother
asking
the
housing
manager
because
his
point
of
view
isn't
relevant
now,
not
in
a
million
years
can
this
particular
development
be
in
tune
with
the
development
needs
of
this
community,
and
it's
not
just
this
community,
it's
the
outer
south
west
area,
as
I'm
sure
our
policy
colleagues
have
told
us.
So
this
complies.
This
is
an
obligation,
that's
imposing
everywhere
from
workley
farley,
draglington,
gilderson,
all
the
way
through
to
east
elderly
and
beyond.
I
So
there's
no
localism
at
this
particular
point
you're
in
a
situation
where
the
rich
and
wealthy
42
of
this
that's
what
you're
going
to
get
out
of
this
housing
site,
poor
people
stuck
in
one-bedroom
apartments
by
and
large,
at
this
particular
stage
and
the
planners
will
tell
you
you
don't
need
to
worry
accounts
because,
based
upon
some
figures
five
years
ago,
it
includes
everywhere
from
working
all
the
way
through
to
east
asley.
It's
absolutely
compliant.
Now,
if
that's
the
case,
then
I
don't
know
what
our
role
is.
I
We
might
as
well
just
be
rubber
stamping
what
the
planners
actually
tell
you
at
this
particular
stage.
Now
casper
amateur
hasn't
got
her
trees.
He
may
or
may
not
be
comfortable
with
that.
Council
cargill
spoke
very
eloquently
last
time
about
the
need
for
us
to
take
climate
change
seriously
and
ask
for
those
sequestration
things
not
getting
any
of
those.
There
are
eight
points
that
we're
supposed
to
hit,
including
consultation
with
local
world
members,
and
we
were
told
at
that
particular
point
that
consultation
with
world
products
wasn't
necessary.
I
So
I
can't
really
see
what
our
role
is.
If
we're
really
saying
that
policy
h4
is
complied
with,
and
this
really
is
acceptable
for
people
on
low
incomes
in
and
around
this
particular
area,
then
that
clearly
isn't
supported
by
the
evidence.
All
of
you
are
clearly
aware
of
at
this
particular
they're,
going
to
be
serious
on
climate
change
and
saying
we're
right.
He
said
one
three
out
of
three
that's
great
and
we
don't
understand
the
actual
cost
of
losing.
I
J
I
say
I
would
concur
with
what's
just
been
said:
I
can't
support
it.
The
only
thing
I
would
go
a
bit
further
on
is
that,
bearing
in
mind
the
last
time
we
spoke
about
this
we've
had
elections
in
between
times,
so
the
chances
of
consulting
with
ward
members
have
been
very
limited
and
to
actually
sit
down
and
have
workshops
or
forum
with
the
relevant
counselors
councilman.
J
I
didn't
know
about
it.
You've.
Somebody
else
mentioned
that
she'd
sent
an
email
in,
so
she
obviously
feels
she
hasn't
been
kept
fully
informed,
never
mind
the
other
counsellors
they
they've
got.
They
can
speak
for
themselves,
but
councilman
appeared
to
indicate
that
she
hadn't
been
kept
fully
informed.
J
So
I'm
I'm
not
happy
with
this
application
because
there
doesn't
appear
to
have
been
for
the
reasons
that
council
finnegan
pointed
out,
but
also
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
great
effort
to
consult
with
ward
councillors
and
to
work
with
the
residents
in
order
to
find
solutions
to
this.
It's
been
brought
back
very
very
quickly
and
as
a
result
of
that,
it's
meant
that
they've
not
been
able
to
raise
their
concerns,
and
I
accept
the
explanation
from
the
legal
officer,
I'm
not
in
any
way
disputing
what
the
legal
officer
has
said.
F
I
don't
have
much
to
say
chair,
I'm
just
going
to
say
that
whether
we
have
election
or
not
we're
still
counsellors,
and
we
need
to
continue
to
fulfill
our
duties.
And
I
heard
the
officers
say
that
the
councillors
were
emailed
with
regards
to
the
email
we
all
received,
saying
that
they
didn't
get
any
notification.
C
B
I
do
apologize
because
it
should
have
been
picked
up
early.
I
don't
remember
it
being
done
done
so,
but
there
is
a
slight
alteration
to
the
recommendation,
which
stands
as
deferring
delegates
to
chief
playing
officer
approval
subjected
to
specified
conditions,
but
it's
also
I'd
like
to
add
for
the
expiration
of
the
advertisement
period,
because
the
advertisement
period,
I
think,
runs
out
tomorrow
and
if
any
new
material
consideration
should
come
forward.
Obviously
we'd
bring
it
back
to
panel,
but
the
likelihood
of
that
happened.
I
just
want
to
be
clear
that
members
understand
that.
C
Do
you
want
to
point
out?
I
think
this
plan
application
has
now
been
in
front
of
city
plans
panel
and
southwest
panel
planners,
probably
for
about
seven
or
eight
hours
into
total
deliberation
time.
People
may
or
may
not
like
the
application,
but
I've
never
seen
an
application
that
hasn't
benefited
from
coming
in
front
of
elected
members
of
this
city
council,
in
whatever
panel
they
sit
on,
and
that's
the
case
here,
whether
or
not
we
particularly
like
this
panel.
C
C
C
C
Right,
so
if
we
could
turn
to
agenda
item
nine
page,
one
four,
nine
now,
this
is
absolutely
definitely
craig
house
on
this
time,
which
was
subject
of
a
site
visit
this
morning,
and
I
recommend
it
as
a
place
to
visit
in
leeds
council.
Anderson
has
given
advice
and
actually
given
advice
to
the
applicant
and
so
has
recused
himself
from
this
item.
On
that
basis,
stephen,
let's
proceed.
N
Thank
you
chair.
I'm
stephen
wilkinson,
I'm
the
case
officer
for
for
this
planning
application.
It
relates
to
the
demolition
of
existing
building
and
the
construction
of
a
new
replacement
timber
reflector
building
at
crackhouse
farm
in
in
cockroach,
and
it's
brought
before
a
panel
as
it's
situated
in
the
green
belt,
and
it's
considered
to
constitute
a
departure
from
the
development
plan
and
just
to
let
you
know
the
applicant
and
the
agent
are
on
hand
today
to
answer
any
questions.
N
If
you
have
any
afterwards
and
you
can
come
over
to
the
table,
if
you
wish
so
first
slide,
please
so
towards
the
center
of
the
plan
there,
you
can
see
a
small
red
line
boundary
and
then
you've
got
the
wider
blue
line
boundary,
which
is
the
other
landing
in
the
ownership
of
the
applicant.
N
So
you
can
see
the
actual
application
site
forms,
a
small
part
of
a
wider
land
holding
which
encompasses
the
collection
of
farm
buildings
and
the
wider
agricultural
land,
and
there's
also
the
long
access
that
we
came
up
on
on
the
site
visit
today
from
from
the
old
road
from
yeah,
which
takes
you
to
the
car
park
to
the
front
of
the
nursery
and
next
slide
please.
N
N
N
Ireland
uses
like
the
meetup
area
and
when
we
went
on
on
site
today
showed
it
was
gonna,
be
set
up
for
the
for
the
lunchtime
meals
for
for
these
people
that
help
on
the
wider
side.
So
it's
ancillary
to
those
those
like
adult
learning
center
uses.
N
You
can
also
see
the
cluster
of
trees,
just
the
side
and
rear
of
the
site,
which
we
saw
today
in
crackhouse
farm
to
the
to
the
it's
not
orientated
north
east
north
south
here.
So
it's
just
to
the
right
hand
side
there.
That's
that's
grade
two
listed
next
slide.
Please!
N
This
just
sets
the
wider
context
of
a
range
of
uses
on
site.
I
won't
go
into
too
much
detail
on
this,
but
there's
a
range
of
of
uses
on
the
site.
A
lot
relate
to
the
adult
learning
center
uses.
You've
got
a
few
commercial
uses
in
terms
of
a
plant
nursery,
a
cafe
and
a
restaurant
and
a
farm
shop
there's
a
couple
of
residential
units
and
then
you've
got
a
wider
agricultural
uses
as
well.
N
Next
slide,
please,
these
are
the
existing
buildings,
so
the
existing
refractory
buildings
at
the
top
are
just
green
painted
timber
with
a
corrugated
roof.
I
suppose
at
the
time
they
were
intended
to
have
a
temporary
lifespan,
they've
kind
of
outlived
that
and
in
quite
a
poor
state
of
repair.
You
can
see
some
accessibility
issues
with
the
ramps
and
stuff
there
and
then
you've
got
a
series
of
storage
containers
towards
the
bottom
of
the
site.
N
Next
slide,
please!
This
is
the
view.
This
is
probably
the
clearest
view
you
get.
You
don't
tend
to
get
wider
views
of
the
site,
but
this
is
from
the
access
to
towards
the
car
park.
It
just
shows
you
the
scale
and
size
of
those
buildings
and
the
relationship
to
the
trees
and
just
down
the
left-hand
side.
There's
that
the
access
to
the
like
commercial
elements,
I
suppose,
if
a
wider
farm
complex
the
next
next
slide,
please
now.
This
is
a
comparison
of
the
footprints
of
the
existing
on
the
left.
N
So
you've
got
six
buildings
there,
six
separate
buildings,
a
lot
of
them
are
interlinked
and
the
new
proposal
on
the
right
hand
side
there.
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
new
building's
been
pulled
slightly
further
away
from
the
trees,
but
it
is
is
larger
in
footprint,
cumulatively
than
what
it's
replacing
next
slide.
Please.
N
And-
and
this
is
showing
you
a
floor
plan
for
building,
so
if
we
just
go
from
top
to
bottom
there's
a
an
access,
sorry
there's
an
entrance
porch,
some
some
toilets
and
then
the
key
parts
is
like
a
large
dining
space.
Then
you've
got
kitchen
and
office
areas
and
a
food
storage
area
to
the
south,
and
you
can
see
the
green
trees
on
there
on
the
plan.
There
that's
proposed
new
planting.
N
So
as
part
of
this
scheme,
the
applicants
are
proposing
significant
new
tree
planting
to
expand
that
existing
cluster
to
the
north
and
east
next
plan.
Please
this
is
the
elevations
of
the
existing
buildings
next
slide.
Please,
then
this
is
what's
proposed.
N
So
so
it's
a
single
story,
structure,
constructed
of
timber
with
a
metal
sheet
roof,
and
we
think
that
the
farm
and
size
of
the
building
you
know
it's
not
out
of
keeping
with
it
with
the
agricultural
context
of
the
wider
sites.
N
Can
we
have
a
next
slide,
please
these
are
some
some
3d
mock-ups,
so
these
don't
show
the
proposed
new
tree
planting,
but
they
give
you
an
appreciation
of
what
the
building
might
look
like.
So
if
you
can
just
go
for
the
next
next
few
tail
being
just
leave
a
little
gap.
N
So
I've
detailed
the
very
special
circumstances
in
paragraph
77
of
the
report
and
they
mainly
revolve
around
a
functional
need
for
the
building
to
meet
the
needs
of
the
users
of
the
site,
there's
also
environmental
improvements,
because,
as
you
can
gather
from
those
pictures,
this
new
building
is
going
to
be
a
significant
improvement
environmentally
compared
to
what's
there.
Existing
there'll
also
be
a
visual
aspect.
N
Uplift
in
that
regard,
and
there's
also
going
to
be
improvements
for
accessing,
like
disabled
access
functionality
of
the
buildings.
As
well
so,
the
conclusion
we've
come
to
in
this
regard
is
that
in
this
instance,
we
think
that
the
very
special
circumstances
do
outweigh
the
the
moderate
harm
we've
identified
to
the
green
belt.
So
we
recommend
approval,
subject
to
the
conditions
that
are
specified
at
the
start
of
the
report.
C
A
C
I
wholeheartedly
agree:
council
smith.
E
I
was
just
gonna
say
as
much
as
I
don't
like
building
in
the
green
belt.
I
don't
think
this
development
will
do
anything
like
the
harm
that
that
long
road
leading
in
will
have
done,
and
I
also
don't
think
that
it
would
do
any
harm
compared
to
what
is
already
there.
E
I
think
this
will
be
a
vast
improvement
overall,
because
it'll
be
more
efficient,
it'll
be
more
suited
to
its
needs
and
well,
I
know
it's
a
comment
but
yeah,
I'm
happy
with
this.
Thank
you.
C
A
C
C
It's
quite
all
right,
no
undoubtedly!
So!
Yes,
so
that's
unanimous
in
favor!
Thank
you
very
much,
colleagues
that
was
that
was
short
and
sweet.
So
we
now
move
on
to
item
10..
Now
this
is
the
one
we
spoke
to
at
the
start
of
the
meeting,
because
I
have
on
behalf
of
all
three
heavenly
ward
councillors
heading
the
high
power
council
has
written
in
support
of
the
application.
C
M
C
Talking
about
him
right
more
seriously,
you
ride
whole
bunch.
This
is
the
item,
so
I've
spoken
in
favor
of
the
application.
So
I'm
going
to
recuse
myself
from
the
chair
for
this
item.
So
we
need
a
an
august
colleague
to
be.
C
K
C
C
Right
can
we
show
our
hands
in
favor
council
as
a
word,
the
propriety
of
democracy
is
served
right.
Give
us
a
second
folks.
While
we
rearrange
ourselves.
H
N
Thank
you
chair.
This
application
relates
to
the
proposals
that
head
in
the
community
centre
just
before
I
start
there's
just
a
quick
update
we've.
Since
the
report
was
published,
we've
received
one
further
representation,
and
that
said,
that
was
a
general
comment.
It's
only
very
short,
so
I'll
just
read
it
out
verbatim.
N
N
Right
us
that
the
application
is
brought
to
panel
because
we
received
the
referral
request,
which
was
jointly
from
councillors,
walsh
or
garthwaite
and
prior,
and
that
the
reasons
for
this
covered
in
paragraph
one
of
the
reports
and
I'd
also
like
to
say
the
conservation
officer
is
here
today
to
offer
any
specialist
advice,
if
you'd
like
to
to
draw
on
that.
N
So
the
proposal
relates
to
trendy
use
of
a
pharma
community
center
to
an
apartheid
hotel,
and
the
works
include
an
extension
of
the
existing
boiler
room,
a
roof
replacement,
including
dome
windows,
various
fenestration
changes
and
reconfiguration
and
subdivision
of
a
service
yard.
No
off-street
parking
is
proposed
as
part
of
the
proposals
next
slide.
Please.
N
This
is
just
yeah,
a
very,
very
small
location
plan,
so
the
red
line
boundary
shows
that
the
site
of
the
former
community
centre-
and
you
can
see
the
blue
line
plan
to
the
the
small
blue
line
boundary
to
the
side.
So
that's
38
bennett
road,
which
is
also
in
the
applicants
ownership
as
well.
So
the
site's
mainly
the
existing
building,
a
very
small
service
you
had
just
to
the
north,
which
is
the
the
clear
area
there
next
slide.
Please.
N
This
is
just
a
clearer
picture
for
that,
but
it
also
shows
the
subdivision
of
the
of
the
service
yard,
because
the
joining
38
bennett
road,
which
is
in
use
as
two
apartments
needs
some
like
bin
storage
and
another
immunity
space
as
well.
Next
slide,
please.
N
So
this
just
gives
you
a
bit
of
context
for
the
for
the
location
of
the
site.
So
it's
a
very
prominent
location
on
the
on
the
corner
of
north
lane
in
heddingly
and
bennett
road,
which
goes
to
the
right
hand,
side
there
and
it's
a.
N
It's
a
currently
vacant
building
and
you
can
see
just
to
the
the
top
of
that
image
there.
There's
the
heavenly
taps
public
house
it's
car
park
and
to
the
left-hand
sides
of
farmer,
lounge
cinema
and
the
ark
pub
extends
that
way
as
well.
N
It's
it's
located
the
site's
located
within
heavenly
town
centre.
It's
also
within
the
conservation
area
and
and
the
taps
heavenly
taps
lodge
gate,
piers
and
boundary
wall
to
to
the
top
of
the
image.
There
are
listed
buildings
next
image,
please.
N
So
this
is
a
picture
of
the
existing
building.
So
it's
of
the
two-story
domestic
scale.
It
displays
arts
and
crafts
detailing.
It's
got
critter
style
windows,
it's
got
a
distinctive
curved
roof
and
the
building
turns
the
corner
in
the
road.
N
You
can
also
see
its
relationship
with
the
with
the
highway,
so
it
directly
above
the
highway
and
just
on
the
left
hand
side.
There
you've
got
the
pelican
crossing,
which
goes
across
from
from
the
ark
towards
this
building.
N
Next
slide,
please-
and
this
is
just
looking
a
bit
further
away
on
on
off
lane,
so
you
can
see
the
character
on
on
the
right
hand,
side
it's!
N
It's
commercial
in
nature
down
there
with
some
single
story,
elements
and
you've
got
the
the
two-story
building,
which
is
in
question
here
and
on
the
other
side
of
the
road.
You've
got
commercial
elements
again,
but
those
buildings
are
of
a
different
style
next
slide.
Please,
and
this
is
a
an
image
from
the
taps
car
park.
Looking
at
the
the
side.
Well,
I
think
it's
it's
detailed,
the
rear
on
the
plans
of
the
building
survey.
N
The
building
in
question
is
you
can
see
that
that
gable
there,
so
the
building
appears
two-story
and
it's
got
the
brick
gable
with
that
chimney
and-
and
the
listed
lodge
I
was
talking
about
is-
is
in
the
right
hand,
side
of
this
picture
here,
so
you
can
see
the
relationship
between
the
two
buildings
and
the
building.
On
the
left
hand,
side
is
the
38
bennett
roads,
which
is
also
in
the
applicant's
ownership,
but
but
not
part
of
this
application.
N
N
So
this
is
the
the
floor
plan
of
the
proposal,
so
the
proposal
is,
for
eight,
a
part:
hotel
rooms,
there's
also
a
conference
room
in
the
the
bottom
left-hand
picture.
There's
the
ground
floor
plan,
so
the
room,
that's
colored
in
green.
The
left-hand
side
of
that
is
for
a
conference
room
and
then
I
just
wanted
to
point
out.
There's
two
bedrooms
at
ground
floor
level.
So
so
these
are
the
ones
adjacent
to
the
the
pelican
crossing
that
I
pointed
out
before.
N
So,
if
you
look
there,
the
kind
of
detailed,
so
they've
got
a
bed
and
some
living
accommodation
and
those
beds
are
laid
out
adjacent
to
to
those
windows.
N
Then
there's
accommodation
at
first
flooring
and
what
this
proposal
is
doing
as
well
is
also
going
into
the
roof
space
of
the
existing
building
and
we'll
see
that
on
the
next
plan
next
plan,
please
so
this
is
the
the
top
image
is
what
the
development's
going
to
look
like
from
the
taps
car
pack.
So
I
showed
you
that
picture
of
the
brick
gable
and
the
chimney
and
the
top
image
shows
you
what
the
resultant
development
will
look
like
following
this
proposal.
N
So
they'll
the
chimney
will
be
lost
and
that
the
brick
gable
will
be
replaced
with
a
with
render
and
then
you've
got
the
mansard
roof
as
well,
and
what
you've
got
here
is
the
existing
building's
two-story
scale
and
you
can
see
there's
it
creates
a
three-star
mass
with
the
with
the
windows
going
up
there
and
that
the
the
bottom
image.
So
this
is
the
knife
laying
elevation.
So
this
is
the
one
where,
if
you
were
crossing
over
the
road
at
the
pelican
crossing,
this
is
what
you'd
be
looking
at.
N
So
some
some
key
elements
to
point
out.
There
is
changing
the
roof
of
the
building,
so
you
can
see
the
steepness
on
the
top
image
of
this
mansiled
roof
of
the
dharmas
and
then
there's
there's
eight
dormers
in
total
proposed
you'll
see
the
others
in
a
minute.
The
windows
have
been
redesigned
and
reproportioned,
and
that
includes
dropping
the
seal
level.
So
the
existing
sills
are
being
dropped
to
near
pavement
level
almost,
and
can
we
go
on
to
the
next
slide?
N
Please
the
bennett
road
elevation
shows
in
conjunction
with
the
and
the
flats
next
door,
and
you
know
similarly
here
that
all
the
windows
being
replaced
with
these
new
style
windows,
which
have
a
horizontal
emphasis
and
then
you've
got
additional
dharma
windows
there
and
a
new
doorway
is
being
proposed
on
the
bottom
there
in
between
the
the
right
hand,
windows
and
then
the
bottom
image
shows
like
the.
N
If
you're
looking
at
it
from
corner
on
and
shows
you
the
new
entrance
to
the
building,
you
can
see
there
there's
a
like
a
juliet
style
element
at
first
floor
level
and
a
dormer
on
that
corner.
N
And
this
is
a
3d
image
that
the
applicants
have
provided.
So
I
just
need
to
caveat
this
by
saying
this
is
one
that
was
put
in
when
the
application
was
first
submitted,
but
there's
only
been
very
small
changes
which
included
a
slight
reduction
in
the
height
since
then,
but
it
does
give
you
a
good
overview
of
the
style
of
the
new
development
you
know
and
what's
envisaged
for
the
sites.
N
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
new
building
would
have
a
contemporary
appearance
and
it's
got
these
dark
window
reveals,
and
you
know
almost
given
the
extent
of
it.
The
changes
proposed
it'll
almost
appear
as
new
building
compared
to
what's
there
as
existing.
If
we
go
on
to
the
next
slide,
please
these
are
some
historic
images,
so
so
the
top
one
shows
a
picture
of
when
it
was
used
as
a
police
station,
it
was
actually
a
brick
building
back
then,
and
then
you
can
see
from
from
the
image
below
which
is
from
1931.
N
The
building
was
rendered
there
and
the
buildings.
The
fabric
of
the
building
is
largely
the
same
as
what
it
was
then
in
1931,
and
if
you
go
into
the
next
image,
this
is
just
from
the
middle
of
the
20th
century
and
again,
a
lot
of
that
character
remains
as
existing
as
you'll
have
seen
from
those
photos.
Now
that
you
know
it
has
been
vandalized
the
building
there
is
some.
N
There
is
some
graffiti
in
that
there
are
some
windows
that
need
replacing,
but
these
are
you
know,
superficial
in
a
way
to
the
to
the
you
know,
inherent
character.
N
So
moving
on
to
the
to
the
key
planning
issues,
you'll
know
from
the
the
officer
report
that
the
principal
of
the
apart
hotel
use
is
considered
acceptable
and
then
the
part
hotel
is
you
know
it's
within
the
c1
hotels
used
class
for
differing
away
in
in
safari
to
have
more
facilities,
she's
associated
with
an
apartment
such
as
a
separate
living
room
and
cooking
facilities,
and
that
can
also
be
accommodated
for
longer
periods
of
time.
N
So
we
usually
allow
them
up
to
up
to
three
months
occupancy
in
such
uses,
but
given
the
town
centre
location,
we
think
that
the
principle
of
the
use
is
fine,
but
from
the
from
the
report
you'll
note,
we've
got
two
key
issues
which
are
the
heritage
impacts
and
the
impacts
and
on
the
immunity
of
the
occupiers
of
these
hotel
rooms.
N
So,
firstly,
it's
probably
better
toby.
If
we
go
back
to
one
of
the
the
pictures
of
the
site,
whilst
I'm
talking
through
this
actually
can
we
go
back
to
the
proposed
elevations
I'll.
Just
get
you
a
a
number
number.
Eight
he'll
do.
N
So,
in
terms
of
the
the
heritage
impacts,
I
mean
the
sites
within
a
sensitive
location
from
a
heritage
point
of
view,
it's
considered
to
be
a
positive
building
in
the
conservation
area,
and
it
also
sits
very
close
to
several
listed
buildings
and
structures.
N
You
know,
as
I
pointed
out,
whilst
there
is
some
graffiti
and
damage
these,
these
are
actually
superficial.
So
we
think
that
the
key
harm
from
the
proposal
is
is
from
the
new
roof
farm,
so
the
building's
effectively
having
a
new
roof
and
it's
a
steep-sided
mansard
roof.
With
the
addition
of
these
eight
diameters,
which
largely
dominate
that
roof
line.
N
N
We
think
that
the
loss
of
the
the
brick
two-story
gable
and
the
chimney
creating
an
almost
three-story
elevation
is
detrimental
to
the
character
of
the
building
as
well
and
overall,
the
building's
going
for
like
an
art,
deco
style
and-
and
we
don't
think
that
this
is
this
is
sympathetic
to
the
existing
building
and
the
proposed
change
is
the
scale
of
the
actual
works.
That
required
for
this
use
effectively
mean
that
the
not
much
of
the
the
character
of
the
existing
buildings
can
be
retained
and
it's
almost
akin
to
to
a
new
building.
N
So
overall,
we
think
that
this
hamster
conservation
area
is
is
less
than
substantial.
Looking
at
the
government,
the
mppf
tests,
but
nevertheless,
that's
still
significant
harm
and
as
I've
set
out
in
in
paragraph
64,
where
there
is
ham
where
harm
is
considered
to
constitute
less
than
substantial
harm
to
the
significance
of
a
heritage
asset.
N
This
should
be
weighed
against
the
public
benefits
of
the
scheme.
Now,
in
this
instance,
there
are
public
benefits,
the
building's
been
vacant,
and-
and
it
will
create
a
use
of
this
for
this
building
and
I've
I'll
outline
the
other
public
benefits
in
in
paragraph
65.
N
But
we
we
think
that
this
application
is
going
to
result
in
significant
harm
to
the
to
the
heritage
assets
and
and
whilst
we
support
the
reuse
of
the
building,
we
don't
think
this
can
be
at
any
cost.
And
so
in
this,
in
this
instance,
we
think
it
will
be
considerable
harm
and
those
public
benefits,
whilst
denoted,
won't,
won't
outweigh
that
harm.
N
And
then
the
second
issue
is
in
relation
to
immunity.
So
you're
going
to
have
people
accommodating
these
ground
floor
apart
hotel
rooms,
and
can
we
go
back
a
couple
of
pictures
to
the
to
the
one
showing
the
pelican
crossing
toby,
just
a
couple
more
that
one
there
yeah.
N
So
there's
gonna
be
a
couple
of
hotel
rooms
on
on
the
left-hand
side
of
that
that
building
there
at
ground
floor-
and
this
is
one
of
the
busiest
parts
of
headingly
there's
no
there's
no
buffer
away
from
the
from
the
narrow
pavement
there
and
it's
busy
into
the
early
hours
of
the
morning,
because
if
it's
close
proximity
to
the
to
the
ark
and
and
the
taps,
we
just
think
that
the
layout
with
the
with
the
bedrooms
close
up
to
those
windows,
it's
going
to
require
blinds
and
curtains
to
be
drawn.
N
Constantly
they're
going
to
have
no
outlook
from
there.
It'll
also
be
noisy
whilst
triple
glazing's
proposed.
We
don't
really
have
any
any
reports
or
anything
would
indicate.
This
would
be
an
acceptable
level
of
mitigation
in
that
regard,
so
so
the
use
of
those
ground
floor
rooms
as
this
accommodation
gives
rise.
A
second
reason
for
refusal
and
there's
also
the
potential
for
the
occupants
to
occupy
the
rooms
for
longer
than
a
typical
hotel
use
as
well.
So
you
know
the
level
of
immunity
in
those
rooms
we
need
to
give
consideration
to
so.
N
Overall,
we
think
it'd
also
result
in
a
poor
standard
of
living
for
the
people
within
those
those
rooms.
So
I've
set
out
two
reasons
for
refusal
in
the
report
which
relate
to
the
impact
on
the
conservation
area
listed
buildings
and
street
scene,
as
well
as
the
impact
on
on
the
occupies
of
the
room
and
as
such,
we're
recommending
that
the
application
is
refused.
H
Okay,
thank
you
because
officers
are
recommending
refusal.
We
do
have
the
applicant
here
to
speak
against
that
refusal.
So
I'm
going
to
hand
over
to
alexander
ball.
Am
I
am
I
right
yep
all
right
right,
you're
doing
it
together?
Okay,
no
problem!
You
have
four
minutes,
I'm
all
right!
Thank
you!
Yep
four
minutes
between
you,
yeah
yeah,
but
four
minutes
between
yeah,
okay,
okay
I'll
hand
over
to
you.
O
Thank
you
good
afternoon.
The
proposed
development
represents
an
opportunity
to
preserve
a
long-term
vacant
building
by
providing
an
economically
sustainable
use
and
enhances
appearance
and
appearance
of
the
wider
conservation
area.
The
scheme
has
been
heritage-led
from
its
inception,
supported
by
input
from
a
highly
experienced
heritage
consultant
and
with
full
regard
to
the
heritage,
significance
of
the
building
and
its
role
in
the
historic
environment.
O
O
I
would
also
like
to
point
out
that
during
pre-application
stage,
the
applicant
engaged
with
the
council
and
following
the
feedback,
numerous
changes
were
made,
notably
the
reduction
in
scale
of
the
proposal
that
was
initially
forced,
very
high.
The
minor
interventions
in
the
elevations
are
considered
to
have
a
moderate,
beneficial
impact
on
the
surrounding
heritage
assets
by
straightening
the
out
decor
design.
O
We
consider
that
officers
objections
to
the
proposed
alterations
to
a
medical
and
much
altered
building
are
overly
conservative
in
denial
of
the
definition
of
conservation.
Instead,
we
consider
the
design
to
have
a
positive
impact,
bringing
a
building
back
to
life
and
significantly
enhancing
the
streets
in
the
conservation
area
and
the
nearby
listed
buildings.
O
With
regard
to
the
second
reason
for
refusal,
we
consider
this
to
be
highly
unreasonable
position
for
offices
to
take.
At
no
point,
we
were
asked
to
provide
a
noise
assessment,
so
officers
had
no
evidence
on
which
to
base
the
reasoning.
Our
view
is
that
the
use
of
triple
grazed
windows
to
mitigate
external
noise
blinds
that
allow
natural
light
and
mechanical
ventilation
to
control
the
temperature
of
the
rims
provide
a
high
level
of
immunity
sufficient
for
the
ground
floor
accommodation.
P
Dear
chairman
members,
I
have
lived
and
worked
in
heavenly
for
a
number
of
years
and
when
the
opportunity
finally
arose,
I
purchased
the
former
community
centre
with
a
hope
of
transforming
it
into
something
that
will
truly
benefit
the
local
area
and
complement
its
surroundings
being
aware
of
its
heritage
setting
in
history,
I
approached
the
refurbishment
plans
with
care
and
appointed
a
team
of
experts
to
ensure
the
highest
quality
outcome.
This
included
an
experienced
heritage
professional
who
was
a
founding
member
of
the
institute
of
historic
building
conservation.
P
As
maria
outlined
we've
considered
various
redevelopment
options
at
the
pre-application
stage
and
made
numerous
changes
following
feedback
from
the
council,
as
you
may
have
noticed
at
your
site
visit
earlier
today.
There
are
other
buildings
on
north
lane
that
have
undergone
extensive
refurbishment
over
the
years,
notably
the
former
lounge
cinema,
located
just
across
the
road
since
its
construction,
the
building
has
accommodated
a
number
of
uses,
but
the
more
recent
attempts
to
turn
into
a
restaurant
and
community
enterprise
support
syndrome
failed.
P
P
Our
hotel
will
provide
an
alternative
to
airbnbs
that
have
proven
to
have
a
devastating
impact
on
many
communities
by
reducing
affordable
housing
options
and
creating
higher
average
rents.
The
apartheil
sectors
won
the
fastest
growing
segments
in
the
overall
accommodation
market
and
town
centre
is
a
prime
location
for
hotels.
In
addition,
prior
to
the
submission
of
our
proposals,
I
personally
spoke
with
the
owners
of
adjacent
businesses
who
expressed
their
support
for
our
proposal
and
their
relief
that
someone
was
finally
doing
something
about
that.
P
I
saw
we
also
intend
to
use
local
produce
as
part
of
our
offering,
which
will
benefit
the
locality
even
further.
We
strongly
believe
that
the
proposed
refusal
will
prevent
an
appropriate
new
use
of
the
building
and
represents
an
unreasonable
and
flexible
approach.
By
approving
our
proposal
today,
you
allow
us
to
give
the
former
head
of
the
community
centre
a
new
lease
of
life
and
to
benefit
the
wider
headed
community.
Thank
you.
H
Okay,
thank
you,
so
colleagues,
questions
to
the
applicant.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
council
hamilton
thank.
F
You
I
would
like
to
ask
you:
why
would
you
change
the
windows,
make
them
lower
on
nearer
to
the
pavement,
rather
than
keep
them
where
they
are
at
this
moment
in
time
also
via
the
crossing?
Why
wouldn't
you
make
that
a
conference
room
rather
than
a
bedroom,
because
it's
right
next
to
to
the
the
crossing,
and
you
mentioned,
that
the
roof
would
be
lower,
but
looking
at
it,
it's
it
look
as
if
it's
raised
with
those
and
what
they
call
evolution
dormers
with
those
dormers.
F
So
how
is
it
lowered
if
it's
gonna
have
dormers
and
also
just
ask
you
about
pick
up
and
drop
off?
Have
you
looked
at
a
pickup
and
drop
off
point
and
where
would
that
be?
P
Thank
you
to
start
with
the
sill
heights.
First
and
foremost,
our
plan
is
actually
to
restore
the
sill
heights,
their
original
height
back
when
it
was
first
built
and
was
a
police
station.
So
unfortunately,
you
weren't
able
to
go
inside
the
building
today,
but
if
you
did
you'd
see
that
they've
been
bricked
up
and
the
original
satellites
were
much
lower,
so
our
plan
is
to
sort
of
enhance
sorry
enhance
that
initial
design
of
the
building,
rather
than
sort
of
further
what
we
think
is
sort
of
poor
design
changes
throughout
the
years.
P
The
next
question,
I
think,
was
regarding
the
roof
height.
Now
again,
our
application
proposes
to
maintain
the
same
roof
height,
so
we're
making
no
change
the
overall
height
of
the
building,
but
we
do
need
to
change
the
design
of
the
roof
structure
just
to
allow
for
that
third
story.
Again,
if
you
went
inside
today,
you
would
have
seen
this
ample
room
within
the
building
to
do
so,
but
it
just
means
there's
some
minimal
changes
to
be
made
to
the
roof
structure.
To
make
that
happen,
pick
up
and
drop
pick
up
and
drop
off.
P
Point
again
I
mean
this
building
was
in
uses
the
community
center.
There
was
a
previous
approved
application
for
a
restaurant,
all
of
which
will
have
a
much
greater
requirement
for
servicing
than
what
we're
proposing
so
yeah.
We
have
looked
at
it.
We
want
to
use
external
contractors
to
use
a
pick
off
and
drop
off
point
at
the
sorry,
pick
up
and
drop
off
point
at
the
service
yard,
and
it's
something
we
need
to
give
careful
consideration
to,
but
highways
had
no
objection
when
we
submitted
our
application.
E
Thank
you
a
couple
of
things,
so
the
go
back
to
the
pickup
drop-off
point
into
the
service
yard.
There
won't
be
much
space
in
that
service
yard,
because
you're
gonna
have
to
put
your
waste
in
there
and
things.
Aren't
you
so?
How
do
you
imagine
that's
gonna
work.
The
other
thing
was:
why
would
you
want
to
change
the
roof
line
so
fundamentally,
on
such
an
iconic
building,
I
mean
it's.
It's
stood
like
that
for
over
a
hundred
years.
E
You
know
it's
a
real
heritage
asset
and
it's
it's
a
beautiful
roof.
It
was
one
of
the
first
things
that
struck
me.
So
I
just
like
to
understand
why
you'd
like
to
change
it.
So
fundamentally
I
mean
the
obvious
one:
is
you
need
to
get
bedrooms
up
there,
but
you
know
why
is
there
any
other
way
of
doing
it?.
O
O
However,
we
understand
that
it's
quite
tight,
so,
for
example,
we
incorporated
few
ways
of
reducing
services,
time
servicing
time
so,
for
example,
doing
laundry
on
site
and
for
the
bins
it's
not
actually
emptying
the
bins,
it's
exchange
of
the
bins
which
takes
less
time
and
that's
only
bi-weekly,
so
basically
try
to
do
that
a
bit
less.
But
what
we're
trying
to
say
that
we
also
can
make
other
arrangements,
because
there
is
an
ample
space
within
a
pub
next
door.
O
However,
like
mentioned
before
highways,
didn't
have
any
problem
with
the
vehicle
during
servicing
time,
reversing
to
the
gate
and
the
gate
automatically
opening
and
taking
the
bins.
It's
just
this
smaller
facilities.
If
this
is
this
will
work
for
a
restaurant,
it
will
definitely
work
for
our
hotel.
Hence
we
didn't
receive
an
objection
on
servicing
grounds.
We
have
also
submitted
a
more
detailed
service
management
plan.
P
If
I
can
answer
your
question
about
the
the
roof
structure,
first
and
foremost,
it's
to
make
the
building
commercially
viable
with
our
proposal,
we
do
need
that
amount
of
rooms
in
there.
Initially
we
put
in
for
pre-application,
and
we
had
an
additional
story
on
there,
which
we've
since
removed
and
just
lowered
the
building
all
together,
but
basically
to
make
it
commercially
viable.
It
is
in
a
serious
state
of
disrepair
and
yeah.
We
think
the
the
dormers
are
a
welcome
and
attractive
addition.
F
Didn't
answer
the
the
question
with
regards
the
bedroom
by
the
pelican
crossing
you
know,
would
you
consider
having
a
conference
room
there
rather
than
a
bedroom.
P
My
apologies,
sorry
yeah.
Absolutely
you
know
we
made
it
clear.
We've
been
more
than
willing
to
compromise
and
make
changes
and
to
make
this
project
work
and
moving
the
conference
room
from
one
side
to
another.
Is
not
a
problem
whatsoever,
we're
more
than
happy
to
look
into
that.
My
only
cons
well
not
concerned,
but
there's
been,
as
maria
stressed,
we've
never
been
asked.
P
There's
been
no
noise
assessment,
there's
nothing
to
evidence
that
any
sound
or
any
noise
pollution
coming
from
that
pelican
crossing
would
cause
a
lack
of
immunity
for
the
residents
of
the
hotel,
yeah
and,
as
you
know,
there's
there's
well
we're
happy
to
move
it
and
come
basically
is
what
I'm
trying
to
get
across.
Thank
you.
B
G
B
P
B
Well,
sorry,
I'm
asking
the
question
for
clarity
for
members,
because
the
implication
from
the
original
answer
was
that
the
ground
floor
windows
were
being
taken
down
to
what
was
the
original
because
she
said
there
was
brickwork
behind.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that.
So
so,
actually
it's
not
strictly
correct!
That
is
it
because
the
the
ground
floor
windows
were
significantly
higher
as
it
showed
on
plate
30
when
it
was
a
playstation.
L
Can
I
just
come
in
on
that?
If
we
go
back
to
the
historic,
if
we
go
back
to
the
historic
photograph,
you
can
see
that
the
it's
the
windows
on
the
corner
that
are
dropped
to
the
sill
band,
not
on
the
rest
of
the
elevation
on
north
lane.
Can
you
make
that
distinction.
E
P
Our
proposal
we
submitted
was
for
all
the
world
all
the
window
levels
to
be
reduced.
However,
we're
more
than
happy
to
maintain
the
existing
sill
heights
of
the
ground
floor,
which
we
have
stressed
previously.
H
Okay
is
that
it
for
questions
to
the
applicant
yep?
Okay,
thank
you.
H
So
now
we've
got
questions
to
officers.
Okay,
so
all
right,
I've
got
council
smith
and
councillor
finnegan.
Thank
you.
E
One
for
the
conservation
officer
and
one
for
the
highways
officer
police,
so
the
conservation
officer.
Obviously
this
is
a
heritage
asset,
it's
a
very
prominent
building.
What
are
your
thoughts
from
a
conservation
point
of
view,
with
the
massing
and
complete
change
of
the
roof
line
of
this
building?
Please.
Thank
you.
L
My
advice
has
been
that
the
alterations
to
the
roof
form
are
harmful
to
the
character
and
appearance
of
the
positive
building
in
the
conservation
area
and
the
domestic
scale
of
the
building
and
its
prominent
roof
form
are
key
parts
of
its
character
and
the
the
roof
alterations
are,
in
effect,
an
additional
story
with
an
inappropriate
roof
form.
The
mount
side
form
is
very
different
from
what's
there
at
the
moment,
and
the
the
dormer
windows
were
being
very
prominent
with
this
being
a
corner
plot.
L
It's
the
end
of
end
point
of
views
from
south
from
north
lane,
so
it's
very
prominent,
and
so
those
changes
will
be
visible
from
quite
a
distance.
E
A
The
the
build
isn't
a
part
hotel
with
no
staff
there.
It
requires
a
minimal
amount
of
servicing,
which
you
know.
Given
that
it's
it's
gonna
empty,
bins,
fortnightly
effectively.
Then
we
would
think
that
that
would
be
acceptable
from
from
the
service
yard.
At
the
back.
I
The
applicant
says
conservation
ring
denial,
are
you
and
the
other
issue
is
the
other
issue?
Is
this
is
a
continuing
debate?
It's
been
empty
for
10
years
at
this
particular
point
and
whether
they
always
have
with
conservation
buildings
is
that
we
hold
out
and
hold
out
and
hold
out
to
a
point
where
someone
wangs
in
a
fire
bomb
or
whatever
it
might
actually
be.
The
whole
thing
goes
up
and
I'm
curious
to
understand
conservation's
point
of
view.
I
At
what
point
do
we
start
to
be
relatively
flexible
for
the
building,
which
is
in
a
poor
state
collapses
in
on
itself?
At
that
particular
point,
there
is
no
nothing
left
to
conserve
and
that's
an
interesting
discussion.
We
certainly
have
that
debate
in
our
neck
of
the
woods
about
the
whole
thing.
At
what
point
do
we
say
10
years,
20
years,
30
years?
If
nothing
happens,
we
just
hope
that
it's
actually
standing
in
40
years
time
with
no
maintenance
or
whatever
I'm
curious,
to
try
and
understand
the
principle
better.
L
L
The
building
has
had
previous
approvals
on
it,
which
just
haven't
been
developed,
but
that
is
not
to
do
with
the
limitations
of
the
building.
That's
more
to
do
with
ownership.
L
Whether
we're
in
denial
or
not,
I
think
one
of
the
problems
with
the
proposal
is
that
it's
seeking
to
impose
an
art,
deco
character
onto
a
building
that
doesn't
have
an
art,
deco
character
or
appearance
in
the
applicant's
heritage
statement
on
page
32,
their
heritage,
specialist,
actually
states
the
altered
building
displays
no
strong
architectural
features
of
the
art
deco
style,
so
my
recommendation
would
be
to
work
with
the
existing
character
of
the
building,
so
the
the
victorian
police
station
and
library
that
you
saw
on
the
historic
photos,
although
the
carcass
of
that
building's
there
its
character
in
appearance,
relates
to
the
1930s
modernization
redevelopment,
but
that
has
positive
character,
but
it's
not
an
art
deco
character.
L
I
We
can
develop
that
bit
further,
because
I
know
conservation
would
love
it
to
be.
You
know,
lovely
and
flowery
and
quickly
and
all
the
rest
of
it
at
this
particular
point,
but
in
terms
of
using
a
building
for
commercial
use,
clear
for
other
things
have
been
tried
and
if
the
world
members
are
to
be
believed,
it's
a
bit
of
an
eyesore
of
a
side.
I
Do
you
feel
we
want
to
retain
that
sort
of
level
of
purity
in
terms
of
conservation,
at
a
point
where
nobody
believes
it's
a
building
that
they're
prepared
to
invest
in
because
they
can't
get
anything
out
of
it,
in
which
case
you
know?
Is
that
a
sustainable
future
for
the
building
the
conservation
area.
L
We
haven't
had
any
evidence
to
suggest
that
the
building
couldn't
have
a
different
use.
There's
been
no
presentation
of
an
optimum
viable
use
case.
So
that
means
that
what's
proposed
is
the
best
case
scenario.
That
case
hasn't
been
put
forward
to
justify
the
harm
being
proposed.
I
think
the
building's
highly
convertible
the
area
doesn't
have
vacancies.
It
doesn't
have
that
problem.
It's
a
vibrant
area.
L
H
I'm
just
bringing
stephen
and
then
I'll
bring
you.
B
Sorry
chair,
I
mean
kate,
almost
said
what
I
was
about
to
say
the
the
the
councillor
finnegan
start
to
that
question,
the
implication
because
what
he
said
was
how
long
would
the
conservative
conservation
wait
before
we
could
be
relatively
flexible,
the
implication
being
it's
the
council
officers
that
have
not
been
flexible
and
therefore
have
hampered
the
the
reuse
of
this
building
for
the
last
10
years.
That's
not
the
case.
That's
nothing!
To
do
with
the
council's
offices
and
previous
suggestions.
B
We
don't
we
don't
know
what
the
issue
is
there,
but
then
kate
did
actually
answer
the
question
by
saying
that
we're
not
we
don't
think
this
is
the
an
optimum
solution.
We
are
quite
happy
with
the
principle
of
an
apartheid
hotel,
but
the
effective
damage
from
our
perspective
to
the
building.
It's
just
unacceptable
in
terms
of
what
you're
doing
to
it.
So
I
think
it's
not
a
question
of
being
relatively
flexible.
It's
just
that
there
are
very
significant
alterations
to
the
building
that
still
does
retain
some
of
its
original
character.
N
Yeah,
all
I
was
going
to
add
is
you
know?
The
headline
point
is
that
it's
been
vacant
for
10
years,
but
I
think
when
you
look
a
bit
closer
than
that,
I
don't
think
we've
got
any
evidence.
It's
been
marketed
for
a
significant
amount
of
time
within
those
10
years
and
I
don't
know
the
full
details.
But
for
some
reason
or
not
it's,
you
know
it's
not
been
available
for
a
single
significant
amount
of
time
and
I'm
not
sure
how
long
it
was
on
the
market
before
the
current
applicant
picked
it
up.
N
But
it's
a
town
centre
location
in
in
a
very
successful
center
in
in
north
leeds
it's
it's
a
could
be
used
for
a
variety
of
uses
and,
as
kate
said,
when
we're
looking
at
less
than
substantial
harm,
and
we've
also
got
to
look
at
the
optimum
viable
use
and
we
haven't
had
any
information
in
terms
of
that
and
that
could
also
look
at
the
number
of
bedrooms
proposed
as
well,
and
we
don't.
We
don't
have
that
information
as
to
whether
that
that
level
of
interventions
required
to
make
the
scheme
viable.
H
Okay,
thank
you.
Everyone,
council
hamilton,
can.
F
I
just
ask:
we
went
on
a
site
visit
today
and
we
only
look
at
the
outside
the
appearance.
Why
didn't
we
have
access
to
the
inside?
So
you
know
we
can
look
sometime,
we
get
a
better
idea
of
of
what
it
would
be
like
with
regards
the
the
the
rooms
etc.
So
can
I
just
ask
you
why
we
weren't
able
to
go
inside.
N
Yeah,
I'm
I
mean
it's
standard
practice
on
these,
like
these,
these
panel
visits
that
we
generally
look
externally
at
the
buildings
I
mean
in
terms
of
the
internal
fabric,
we'd,
usually
look
at
specialist
documents,
looking
at
the
condition
of
buildings,
and
things
like
that
about,
I
I
I
mean
in
terms
of
your
your
appreciation
of
the
internal
internal
elements,
we're
generally
looking
at
at
the
external
impact
in
in
relation
to
this.
The.
F
External
impact,
as
far
as
I
can
see
in
these
papers,
is
retaining
it
as
it
is
by
the
conservation,
but
it's
about
as
part
hotel.
It's
called
you
know
just
to
to
get
a
a
a
view
of
the
upstairs
etc
and
we
do
normally
go
inside
buildings
when
we
go
on
site
visit,
so
we
can
see
and
suggests
what
can
be
retained.
You
know
that's
our
suggestion.
What
can
be
retained
and
then
we'll
say
the
roof
is
to
his
eye
and
it's
got
a
beautiful,
etc.
F
Is
that
going
to
be
retained,
etc?
So
we
only
looked
today
on
the
outside
and
you
know,
through
the
conservation
area
we
didn't
get
to
go
inside
to
see
if
they're
saying
about
eight
bedrooms
or
six
bedrooms.
That's
why
I
asked.
Would
they
move
the
bedroom
from
the
pelican
crossing
and
make
that
the
conference
room?
So
I
would
just
want
to
know
why
we
didn't
get
to
go
in.
B
Simonson
through
the
chair,
yes,
officers
have
not
asked
for
for
internal
access.
I
don't
think
we're
too
worried
about
the
interior,
because
actually
it's
not
a
listed
building,
but
it
is
a
building
of
no
within
within
the
area
and
so
from
our
perspective,
the
external
alterations
are
significant
enough
for
us
to
consider
it
warrants
the
refusal,
because
it
is
quite
a
significant
intervention
with
the
alterations
of
the
roof
and
the
changes,
the
window
designs
and
all
the
rest
of
it.
So
we
haven't
asked
for
it,
but
then
again
the
the
internal
alterations.
H
Yeah,
I
think
that's
the
issue
that
it's
not
a
listed
building,
but
it's
in
a
conservation
area,
so
the
external
appearance
needs
to
be
in
keeping
with
the
area.
I
think
that's
the
the
issue
with
the
internal
with
the
internal
inspection,
any
more
questions
to
officers.
N
Yeah
in
in
terms
of
the
assessments
like
that
that
they're
they're,
led
by
the
the
applicants
submitting
those
assessments
to
you,
know
to
to
prove
they
can
they
can
mitigate
any
any
issues.
I
suppose
so
in
terms
of
this,
we've
made
a
a
judgment
that
we
think
that
took
the
position
of
the
the
rooms
in
the
building.
You
know
we
haven't
got
any
any
evidence.
N
Basically
that
would
tell
us
it
would
be
acceptable
and
we
have
got
concerns
and
we
don't
think
they
can
be
mitigated
just
by
by
triple
glazing
because
that
causes
over
it.
You
know
I
mean
it
is
a
wide
ranging
subject
and
noise
is
just
part
of
it
and
then
you've
got
outlook
some.
You
know
penetration
and
you
know
sunlight
and
other
issues
such
as
that
as
well.
So
you
know
in
in
the
absence
of
a
noise
survey,
I
mean
we
wouldn't
usually
ask
for
a
noise
survey
up
front
for
something
like
this.
J
A
Well,
just
to
clarify,
obviously
it
happens
where
we
want
consultation
responses
from
environmental
health.
In
this
instance,
as
the
office
has
just
explained,
we
didn't
actually
seek
it
because
it
wasn't
required
for
us
to
be
able
to
consider
the
application,
because
there
are
fundamental
issues
with
the
location
of
the
site
beyond
just
noise,
as
he
explained,
we
wouldn't
have
asked
for
it.
J
But
minus
9
was
one
of
the
issues
was
the
location
of
the
crossing
and
also
the
other
activities
that
may
or
may
not
be
happening
in
close
proximity
to
this
in
terms
of
the
arc
and
the
various
other
local.
Well,
let's
be
quite
frank,
the
taps
are
within
you
know,
10
yards
10
feet
of
it.
I
mean
it
would
have
to
be
a
consideration
to
me.
If
someone
was
wanting
to
live
there,
they
certainly
not
live
there
stay
there.
J
They
would
have
concerns
about
the
noise
levels
as
to
whether
or
not
their
sleep
is
or
is
not
or
is
not
going
to
be
disturbed,
and
if
it's
not
going
to
be
disturbed,
then
that's
to
me
to
the
benefit
of
the
applicants,
to
show
that
it
wouldn't
be
detrimentally
affected.
But
my
understanding
of
what
was
said
on
site
today
was
that
that
was
one
of
the
concerns
was
the
proximity
to
the
crossing
and
also
the
additional
nighttime
life
that
goes
on
in
and
around
that
site.
B
We're
just
looking
back
at
some
of
the
information,
and
I
mean
the
the
the
primary
issue
with
this
is
obviously
the
impact
on
the
building.
I
almost
call
it
listed,
then
the
impact
on
the
building
by
the
alterations,
and
so
the
the
secondary
reason
for
refusal,
obviously
is
on
the
the
immunity
issues.
B
But
what
I
would
say
we're
just
looking
at
the
emails
here,
because
isn't
technology,
wonderful,
that
you
can
pull
it
up,
but
going
back
to
monday,
the
14th
of
march
2022,
where
we
did
actually
go
back
to
the
applicants
and
hi.
This
is
steve
speaking.
I've
previously
also
raised
community
concerns
for
users
of
ground
floor
rooms
adjacent
to
northland,
especially
near
the
pelican
crossing.
B
I
feel
that
the
juxtaposition
could
be
improved
by
locating
the
seating
living
room
areas
of
the
roadside
rooms
with
the
bedroom
set
back
into
rooms
where
possible,
and
the
existing
layout
requires
further
justification.
Now
steve
will
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
previously
my
understanding
is
the
applicant
has
been
reluctant,
except
in
today
when
they
did
talk
about
moving
the
conference
room
and
changing
the
height
of
windows.
The
ground
floor
have
actually
basically
been
saying:
no
to
that
and
not
being
prepared
to
do
it
so
steve.
Is
that
correct.
P
B
B
Members
could
obviously
go
for
a
deferral
for
that
information
to
be
sought
because
you've
heard
about
deferrals
today
anyway-
and
many
of
you
obviously
have
seen
it
in
action
before,
but
it
still
leaves
us
with
the
primary
consideration
and
reason
for
refusal,
which
is
the
impact
upon
the
building.
So
the
other
option
is
to
simply
defer
it.
Go
for
further
information,
see
whether
you're
satisfied
with
that,
if
you're
comfortable
with
the
alterations
to
the
building.
B
That's
that's
the
first
problem,
but
if
you're
not
comfortable
with
the
with
the
alterations
of
the
building,
you
could,
the
application
could
be
refuted
on
the
basis
of
these
two
reasons
for
use
and,
of
course,
ultimately
be
up
to
officers
to
justify
those
that
appeal.
If
that's,
where
we
ended
up
or
we
could
proceed
on
the
basis,
somebody
wanted
to
move
it
to
refuse
it
on
the
basis
of
the
impact
on
the
listed
building
and
remove
the
secondary
secondary
reason
for
refusal.
Sorry
yeah,
sorry
on
the
building.
B
Rather,
I
knew
I'd
do
that
we
could.
We
could
continue
with
the
reasons
for
refusal
on
the
impact
upon
the
building
and
and
remove
the
secondary
reasons
for
refusal,
which
is
the
impact
upon
the
immunity
so
effectively.
There's
three
options.
We
could
deal
with
it
as
it
is
at
the
moment.
B
We
could
ask
for
further
information,
accepting
that
the
the
design
is
okay
and
we
have
for
further
information
to
justify
the
the
locus
of
the
bedroom's
amenity
and
potential
amendments
has
been
suggested
by
mr
bell,
or
it
could
be
taking
forward
for
the
refusal
on
the
basis
of
the
impact
upon
the
building
and
remove
the
secondary
reasons
for
refusal,
which
is
the
immunity
problem.
K
Sorry
chair,
can
I
just
build
on
on
the
points
that
steve
has
kindly
made.
There
are
three
complicated
options
that
you've
got
before
you.
I
just
don't
want
you
to
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
you've
got
a
legal
duty
under
section
72
and
66
in
relation
to
this
asset.
I
know
it's
not
a
listed
building,
but
also
the
conservation
area
in
which
it
sits
and
the
clear
comments
that
have
been
made
from
the
conservation
officer.
H
H
Of
the
roof,
would
the
applicant
be
willing.
P
F
Council
hamilton,
no,
I
was
just
I
was
just
going
to
say
if
the
applicant
would
be
happy
to
work
with
the
conservation
officer
with
regards
to
how
they
would
envision
the
building
by
retaining
it
better.
You
know,
that's
what
I
want.
I
mean.
F
Obviously
you
say:
yes,
you
would
move
the
bedroom,
etc
and
all
these,
but
just
to,
if
we
defer
you
know,
I
would
like
to
know,
would
you
be
willing
to
work
with
the
conservation
officer
and
come
up
with
what
they
believe
would
be
suitable
and
and
and
fitting
in
the
area
without
the
dominance
of
the
the
roof
etc?
That
is
being
pointed
out
to
us
today.
O
Sorry
can
I
answer
on
behalf
of
my
client,
so
members.
I
would
just
like
to
say
that
that
isn't
part
of
the
office's
report,
we
had
organized
a
workshop
to
work
with
the
officers
and
a
conservation
officer.
O
Unfortunately
conservation
officer
she
was
unable
to
attend.
We
were
only
told
on
a
day
that
she's
not
attending
our
workshop.
That
workshop
was
attended
by
nadir
khan
from
design
who
was
quite
happy
with
some
of
the
elements
of
our
scheme,
for
example
the
horizontal
windows,
which
I
can
bring
the
comments,
if
necessary.
Obviously
the
case
officer,
stephen
wilkinson,
was
also
present
at
the
workshop,
but
unfortunately
the
workshop
didn't
get
us
anywhere
because
we
couldn't
agree
on
a
fundament
of
the
scheme.
O
However,
we'll
happy
to
go
back
and
obviously
move
the
conference
room
and
change
the
windows
and
work.
Unfortunately,
we
really
felt
during
that
last
12
months,
the
application's
been
in.
It
was
really
hard
to
communicate
with
the
officers
I
have
previously.
I've
have
email
trails
after
email
trails
of
trying
to
organize
something.
I
even
asked
for
a
meeting
at
the
pre-application
stage
and
was
told
that
my
scheme
is
too
small
to
meet
with
to
organize
the
meeting,
even
though,
of
course
we
wanted
to
pay
for
it.
O
We
at
this
stage
that,
of
course,
all
these
changes
could
be
made,
but
our
workshop
didn't
work.
We
didn't
have
a
conservation
officer
and
it
was
too
late
to
postpone
it.
I
understand
that
a
conservation
officer
was
off
sick
that
day,
which
we
only
found
out
on
the
day,
as
I
mentioned,
so
yes,
we
will
work
with
the
council,
but
unfortunately
sorry
to
say
that
so
far
it's
been
painful
and
so
far
we
felt
that
the
council
don't
want
to
work
with
us
and
obviously
the
natural
thing
for
us
to
do
after
today.
O
If
we
can't
agree
anything
is
to
appeal
it,
which
will
be
a
shame,
because
we
much
rather
avoid
appeal
and
work
with
the
council
and
make
sure
you
know
compromises
on
that
building,
but
obviously
this
also
we
hired
a
very
expensive
experienced
conservation,
specialist
who's
telling
us
one
thing
and
a
conservation
officer
is
telling
another.
So
we
just
need
to
find
a
common
ground,
because
we
need
to
make
sure
that
this
building
looks
good
because,
as
you
know,
it
is
such
a
prominent
building.
B
There
was
a
slight
contradiction
in
that.
Wasn't
that
because,
on
the
one
hand,
the
suggestion
was
that
because
of
our
tiredness
in
terms
of
the
meetings,
you
want
a
decision
to
go
to
appeal
with,
in
which
case
we
could
simply
go
to
the
refusal.
Now,
if
that's
the
case
or
or
is
I
if
mem,
if
members
are
minded,
I'm
sorry
I'm
trying
to
assist
it.
Members
are
minded
for
a
deferral.
B
Actually
we're
talking,
we're
talking
about
a
deferral
to
try
and
overcome
some
of
the
immunity
issues
which
might
include
lifting
which
might
include
lifting
the
heights
of
the
windows
which
takes
us
back
towards
what
we
were
looking
at
to
begin
with
is
the
critter
star
window
heights,
etc,
but
then
further
discussions
with
regard
the
external
design
and
the
roof
design.
So
you
could
defer
it
for
further
discussion,
but
that's
obviously
whether
the
the
applicant's
willing
to
engage
in
that
because.
H
As
chair
I'd
like
to
come
in,
I
know
you
both
want
to
come
in,
but
I
just
want
to
say
I
think
I'm
getting
the
the
the
feeling
in
the
room
that
members
are
happy
to
defer
for
this
extra
work
to
be
looked
at
on
the
building.
I
believe
the
applicant
is
happy
to
work
with
planning
officers
and
conservation
officers
to
do
that
as
well.
I'm
all
right!
H
N
I
just
wanted
to
correct
some
of
the
points
which
is
a
bit
of
an
attack
on
myself
and
colleagues
in
terms
of
how
we've
approached
this
so
the
application's
been
in
the
year
and
you'll.
Remember
that
I
showed
you
the
plans
of
what's
proposed
now
and
when
I
brought
in
the
3d
image,
I
showed
you
what
it
was,
and
I
carried
that
saying:
there's
been
some
minimal
changes,
so
it's
been
in
a
year
and
we've
only
managed
to
get
these
absolute
tiny
changes
and
we've,
given
them
significant
comments.
N
Heritage-Led
comments
on
several
occasions
during
the
application
and
we've
just
been
met
with
with
no
changes
whatsoever
as
well.
As
you
know,
we
did
have
a
workshop
and
and
kate
was
ill.
You
can't
help
that
you
know
the
day
before,
but
we
have
given
them
detailed
heritage
comments
and
we've
just
had
nothing
in
return
in
there,
the
the
the
yeah,
but
but
the
you
know,
the
impression
I
got
was
that
there
weren't
you
know
they
weren't
willing
to
be
flexible.
I
mean
this
is
a
whole
new
new
side
of
it.
N
J
The
debate
was
going,
I
mean
originally.
I
was
happy
with
the
refusal
right
so
now,
but
now
it
would
appear
that
we're
going
to
be
moving
an
issue
that
came
out
again.
I
would
like
further
clarity,
then,
if
we
are
getting
further
information
is
that
we
are,
somebody
might
have
been
me
asked
about
how
the
rooms
were
going
to
be
aired,
and
there
was
a
comment
made
that
it
was
thought
that
the
windows
wouldn't
be
able
to
be
opened
and
that
there
would
be
the
use
of
an
air
conditioning
unit
that
respect.
J
If
we
were
deferring
it,
we
would
need
to
start
looking
at
things
from
the
climate
change
as
to
whether
or
not
the
air
conditioning
unit
and
the
carbon
cost
to
that
is
better
or
worse
than
the
noise
damage
that
can
be
done.
If
we
allow
light
it's
a
balancing
judgment,
it's
a
balancing
judgment.
Just
if
it's
that's
what
I'm
getting
yeah.
H
Thank
you.
We've
got
a
note
of
that
count.
Anderson.
Thank
you.
I
think
we're
moving
on
to
comment
rather
than
questions.
I
don't
know
where
we
seem
to
be
we're
moving
into
comics,
councillor,
finnegan
and
then
councillors.
I
My
experience
with
the
conservation
department
over
20
years
that
I've
been
on
the
council
has
been
almost
entirely
painful
at
this
particular
point,
primarily
because
I
think
they
do
live
in
a
different
world
to
a
lot
of
us
and
it
would
have
been
helpful,
and
I
hope
that
if
we
do
have
a
deferral
which
I'm
happy
to
support,
we
get
one
of
the
war
councillors
from
the
headlining
war
to
come
and
talk
to
us
about
what
the
community
says
to
them.
I
Their
feelings
about
the
whole
thing,
primarily
because
sometimes
you
have
to
be
a
little
more
pragmatic
on
buildings.
You
want
to
save
primarily
because
of
the
sheer
expense
of
trying
to
save
them.
The
alternative-
is
you
end
up
year
after
year
after
year,
with
no
realistic,
sustainable
solution
to
it
and
ends
up
with
problems
and
difficulties.
I
I
I'd
like
to
hear
if
we
do
have
a
deferral
from
one
of
the
ward
members
that
are
supposed
to
supported
it
coming
to
panel,
so
we
can
hear
their
particular
point
of
view
and
they
can
be
the
community
leaders
that
they
clearly
are
and
give
us
a
community
element
towards
this.
I'm
sure
that
there
must
be
a
condition
survey
in
here.
The
planners
are
basically
saying
with
no
information
about.
You
know
whether
it's
financially
viable
to
do
this,
and
not
to
do
this
with
this
particular
building.
I
I'm
sure
there
must
be
a
condition
survey
that
the
applicant
has
available.
That
will
show
the
degree
of
investment
that
is
required
to
make
sure
that
this
building
survives
and
when
we've
got
that
information,
and
we
hear
from
those
we'll
be
in
a
better
position
to
be
able
to
make
a
balanced
judgment
about
what
we
do
with
this
particular
building,
which
looks
a
great
building
that
we
need
to
survive.
But
we
we
need
more
information
than
we've
got
in
front
of
us,
including
the
local
war
council
element.
In
my
view,.
H
Okay,
thank
you.
Councilor
finnegan
council,
walter
from
the
back,
is
indicating
you're
even
more
than
happy
to
come
and
fulfill
that
role.
So
thank
you.
I
just
want
to
bring
steve
butler
in
on
one
point
that
you
made
council
of
finnegan
and
then
I
could
take
council
smith.
B
I'm
just
trying
to
capture
the
potential
additional
information
that's
required,
so
I
might,
I
might
actually
go
over
this
again,
but
in
terms
of
that
last
comment.
In
essence,
we're
asking
for
a
viability
assessment
to
justify
the
extent
of
the
works
and
the
internal
arrangement
is
that
what
council
finnegan
is
requesting.
I
I
would
have
thought
that
a
condition
survey
is
something
that
is
available,
that
we
can
at
least
analyze
and
have
a
view
as
to
what
investment
is
required
to
make
sure
that
this
building
survives
the
viability
thing
we've
all
been
here.
We
don't
want
to
go
down
that
particular
path
because
it's
expensive
it's
it's
takes
time,
we're
in
a
situation
where
we
want
a
little
more
information
about
why
we
should
flex
on
this
particular
occasion,
because
I'm
you
know
at
this
particular
point
not
very
one
side
or
the
other.
I
I
want
more
information
before
I
make
a
judgment
on
whether
we
need
to
be
flexible,
whether
it
is
financially
viable,
whether
there
are
other
alternatives
or
whatever
we've
got
that
information,
and
I
always
think
local
award
invest
local
world
member
involvement
is
particularly
important
on
these
occasions.
We
need
to
understand
it
from
their
point
of
view
as
well.
I
hope
that's
helpful
steve.
B
And
I
appreciate
that
admission.
Thank
you,
council
fans
yeah.
I
still.
I
still
do
think
that
those
two
things
are
effectively
interlinked,
because
the
condition
survey
will
only
actually
tell
you
where
the
fabric
of
the
building
is
threatened,
but
it
won't
actually
tell
you
whether
this
need
this
particular
proposal
is
required,
so
they
are
interlinked,
so
I
hopefully
will
get
the
right
information
back.
If
this
becomes
a
deferral.
I
did
just
want
to
make
that
point.
Purely
a
condition.
B
I
To
enjoy
the
pain
any
longer
than
is
entirely
necessary
at
this
particular
point,
but
we
have
a
conditioned
survey.
That's
been
undertaken
by
council
officers
who
that
they're
using
at
this
particular
point
to
try
and
understand
the
investment
needs
of
a
heritage
building
in
the
molly
area.
At
that
point,
what
they
come
back
to
me
and
says:
yeah
we've
got
the
condition,
survey
and
it'll
tell
you.
We
need
to
spend
next
amount
on
it.
B
E
Thanks
chair,
I
think
my
comment
on
this
is
again
it's
probably
down
to
viability
of
viability
of
the
development.
E
If
we
go
to
deferral
and
ask
for
this
information
and
the
applicant
works
with
the
conservation
officer,
you
know
we're
going
to
want
the
roof,
keeping
or
at
least
part
in
part,
and
given
the
response
I
got
to
my
question
earlier,
I
don't
think
that
the
applicant
will
consider
it
a
viable
development.
A
When
we
were
at
the
site
visit
as
well
as
sort
of
the
noise
being
a
detriment
to
the
people,
there
there's
also
the
the
kind
of
discussions
about
the
windows
being
such
close
proximity
and
potentially
being
banged
on
and
stuff
like
that
and
potential
issues
with
that
has
there
been
in
the
vicinity
because,
because
actually,
when
you
look
at
all
the
other
properties
around
I
mean
I
personally
don't
want
the
windows
dropped,
but
nearly
all
the
other
properties
actually
windows
are
dropped,
including
the
grade
two
listed
building.
A
Oh
sorry,
the
listed
building
that
I
presume
is
is
is
down.
Has
there
been
any
incidents
of
any
windows,
including
that,
I
think
has
it
been
said
that
they
are
on
the
next
door
property
as
well,
where
the
windows
at
the
front
have
they
been
smashed
in
or
have
they
been
banged
on?
Has
there
been
disturbances
that
were
aware
of
that,
then
would
impact
on
the
people
staying
in
the
apartment,
hotel.
B
I'm
speaking
to
steve
because
he's
the
case
officer,
but
I'm
assuming
we
have
no
information
whatsoever
of
it,
actually
happening.
It's
just
the
it's
a
perception,
stroke
assumption
based
upon
where
it's
located
in
proximity
to
the
crossing
out
to
other
very
active
uses
such
as
the
arc
and
the
the
taps
public
house
at
the
back.
H
Okay,
colleagues-
and
I
think
we
we're
moving
to
our
decision
on
this,
so
we,
I
think
council
reagan-
wants
to
make
a
proposal
that
we
we
move
to.
A
decision
can.
H
Okay
and
councillor,
given
your
second
name
yep,
thank
you
and
steve
you,
you
will
have
form
of
words
for
us
for
all
our
discussions.
I
know
you've
been
scribbling
away.
There.
B
So
it
is
obviously
the
emotion
that
it's
deferred
further
discussions
with
the
applicant
to
include-
and
this
is
where
it
gets
a
little
bit
trickier-
further
discussion
on
the
design,
in
particular,
regards
to
the
crystal
windows
in
terms
of
height
and
emphasis,
because
that
was
an
issue
that
was
raised
further
discussions
with
the
applicants
regarding
the
roof
design
to
be
more
in
keeping
stroke
sympathetic
to
the
to
the
the
property
council.
Anderson
asked
about
the
the
method
of
ventilation
of
the
rooms
and
assessment
of
how
this
would
be
sustainable.
So
we've
got
that
as
well.
B
Obviously,
the
request
to
reward
members
to
actually
attempt
to
give
their
perspective
when
it
comes
back
to
panel
a
conditioned
survey
which,
despite
our
slight
opinions
here,
the
the
the
comment
that
was
made,
the
condition
survey
is,
is
required
to
actually
justify
the
economic
investment
needs.
So
the
two
are
into
the
change.
B
Interlinked
the
the
the
chain,
the
change
layout
and
the
other
thing
that
I
had
was
about
the
the
quality
of
any
internal
design
that
might
need.
It
was
an
assessment
of
what,
if
there's
anything
internally
that
needs
to
be
kept.
So
I
think,
I
think,
was
that
everything.
B
J
B
Obviously,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
we've
got
these
elements
here
they
will
appear
in
the
minutes
of
the
next
panel
meeting.
So
if
there's
any
question
that
I've
not
got
it
correctly,
obviously
it
can
be
corrected
at
that
point
and-
and
we
will
arrange
something
with
the
applicant
to
discuss
all
of
these
issues,
so
really
it's
to
take
a
vote
on
the.
F
All
right
councillor
finnegan,
said
about
the
ward
member
coming
back
and
we're
hearing
from
from
them.
We
will
hear
from
them
as
long
as
they're
working
with
the
the
developers
because
and
getting
their
feedback
from
the
community.
F
B
Bearing
in
mind
the
discussions,
we've
had
earlier
on
two
applications
about
material
considerations,
whether
they
were
new.
Obviously
the
thing
that
counselor
finnegan
raised
actually
brings
the
opportunity
for
further
speaking
now.
I
think
we'd
have
to
discuss
that
with
the
chair,
which
is
unlikely
to
be
council
hazelwood
to
the
point
that
we
bring
it
back
because
really,
ultimately,
the
the
a
bit
like
the
application
for
hague
ward.
B
We've
discussed
all
of
these
issues
and
we're
bringing
back
answers
to
those
questions
so
they're,
not
necessarily
new
material
considerations,
so
whether
we
get
to
a
point
depending
upon
the
information
that
is
provided
by
the
applicant
as
to
whether
we
then
after
at
the
point
we
get
to
chairs
briefly
discuss
that
with
the
chair
and
the
chair
then
decides
to
exercise
their
the
prerogative
to
actually
allow
further
speaking
and
nikki
may
want
to
add
to
that.
If
I've
not
got
it
correct,.
F
F
As
far
as
I
read,
not
unless
I've
missed
it
from
members
of
the
public
and
that's
why
councillor
finnegan
is
saying
that
the
counselor
could
speak
on
on
the
behalf.
That's
why
so
and
why
wouldn't
the
chair?
Allow
that?
Because
we
haven't
had
a
against
or
afford
just
that
the
applicant
presented
can.
K
I
assist:
can
we
not
predetermine
what
information
we're
going
to
get?
We've
got
the
parameters
of
what
information
you
seek.
One
of
those
one
of
those
issues
is
one
point
that
counselor
finnegan
has
raised
as
a
new
issue.
We
don't
know
what
the
content's
going
to
be.
Let's
wait
for
that
information
to
come
back
and
then
we
can
make
it
an
assessment
as
to
whether
it
sits
within
the
protocol
or
whether
there
needs
to
be
some
discretion
applied,
whether
it
is
significant
new
information
or
if
it's
a
new
material
consideration.
K
H
Can
I
take
the
advice
that
nikki
has
given
us?
All
we
need
to
do
now
is
decide
whether
we
vote
for
or
against
the
proposal
on
the
table
when
councillor
taylor
is
back
and
she
will
be
chairing,
hopefully
at
the
meeting
where
this
comes
back
to
then
we
can
discuss
that
at
that
that
point,
because
I
don't
think
we
can
determine
who's
going
to
speak
now,
because
we
don't
know
what
information
is
going
to
come
back.
H
H
All
right,
colleagues,
can
we
move
to
the
vote
so
the
new
proposal
on
the
table,
which
hopefully
we've
got
right-
please
do
check
it
in
the
minutes
when
they
come
out
to
make
sure
that
we've
included
everything
that
we've
talked
about.
So
can
I
ask
members
whether
they
want
to
vote
for?
First
of
all
for
that
proposal
to
defer
sorry?
Yes,
the
proposal
that
that
steve
butler
has
read
out
to
to
defer
with
those
conditions.
H
H
Two
abstentions:
okay;
okay,
thank
you,
colleagues.
So
anything
else.
B
No,
I'm
just
gonna
summarize
that
the
the
application
has
has
been
deferred
by
members.
Six
four
and
two
are
two
abstentions,
and
obviously
the
the
list
of
things
I've
read
out
and
we'll
put
in
the
minutes
for
clarity
later.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you,
colleagues
do
check
the
minutes
to
make
sure
we've
got
all
those
in.
Thank
you
for
your
perseverance
and
I
believe
the
next
meeting
is
the
7th
of
july.
So
I
will
see
you
all
then
thank
you.