►
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
Excellent,
thank
you
for
that
good
morning.
Everybody
welcome
well
good
afternoon
evening.
Welcome
to
development
plan
panel,
I'm
councillor,
neal,
walsh,
heading
nine,
high
part
ward
and
I
chair
this
panel
you're
almost
very
welcome
and
welcome
to
anybody
watching
us
on
the
world
wide
web.
7.2
billion
potential
viewers.
So
you
never
know
so.
We've
got
a
lot
to
get
through
today.
A
So
what
I
will
do
is
we'll
go
through
a
few
introductions
as
per
normal,
and
I've
got
my
chair
script,
but
just
before
we
go
through
some
introductions,
just
we
have
two
new
members
to
our
happy
band.
A
We
have
council
helen
hayden
who
can
introduce
themselves
when,
when
we
go
through
their
names
in
in
alphabetical
order-
and
we
have
councillor
kelly
brooks
who
will
be
joining
us
and
replacing
councillors,
lisa
mulherin
and
council
sal
arif
respectively,
so
you're
most
very
welcome
to
us
to
join
us
and
I'd
just
like
to
take
this
opportunity
to
thank
lisa
and
cell
for
all
their
efforts
over
the
last
few
years
and
this
sterling
work
they've
done
and
wish
them
very
well
in
their
new
roles.
A
So
without
further
ado,
so
I've
got
a
a
few,
a
few
as
usual
prepared
words
just
so
we
can
square
away
the
legal
side
of
things
with
regard
to
our
remote
meeting.
So
I'd
like
to
start
today,
the
meeting
today
by
confirming
that
this
meeting
of
development
plan
panel
meets
the
requirements
of
the
council's
constitution.
Even
though
members
of
the
panel
are
in
remote
attendance
whilst
items
today's
will
be
fully
discussed
as
usual,
remote
attendance
requires
a
few
slight
changes
to
how
I
manage
the
debate.
A
A
Then
we
appreciate
that
sometimes
cameras
need
to
go
off
and
all
participate,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
will
be
invited
to
introduce
themselves
at
the
start
of
the
meeting,
so
make
it
clear
to
public
observers,
who's
involved
and
members
wishing
to
ask
questions
and
make
comments
should
do
so
by
using
the
raised
hand
facility,
and
I
will,
as
always,
endeavor
to
see
those
in
the
order
that
they
appear.
A
E
He's
on
the
call
chair,
but
it
looks
like
he's
taking
a
phone
call
at
the
moment.
A
Thanks
for
that,
there
was
a
wee
bit
of
lag
on
your
voice
there
helen,
so
I
don't
know
if
there's
anything
to
do
about
it.
D
D
G
So
hello,
principal
planner
here
for
the
second
item.
A
E
Thanks
chair,
so
there
are
no
appeals
against
the
refusal
of
inspection
of
documents
under
agenda
item
number:
two:
there
are
no
items
which
require
the
exclusion
of
the
press
and
public
under
agenda
item
three.
With
your
agreement
chair,
a
formulate
item
of
business
has
been
received
and
papers
were
circulated
to
the
panel
prior
to
the
meeting
in
terms
of
agenda
item.
Seven
lead
site
allocations,
plan
under
agenda
item
number:
four
police
can
ask
members
to
declare
any
disposable
pecuniary
address
I'll,
take
silence
as
none
under
agenda
item
number.
A
What
so,
before
I
move
on
to
go
through
the
minutes,
there's
actually
a
change
to
our
agenda
that
I
want
to
to
get
the
agreement
of
panel.
So
under
agenda
item
h,
which
is
a
local
plan,
update,
there's
been
quite
a
lot
going
on
and
one
of
our
running
themes
actually
isn't.
A
It
has
been
a
succession
of
government
consultations
on
guidance
and
and
and
what
have
you
been
issued
and
that's
happening
all
the
time
at
the
moment,
and
it's
rather
caught
up
with
the
work
we're
doing,
because
we
were
due
to
submit
paper
to
executive
board
the
next
executive
board.
However,
at
the
moment,
we've
got
a
few
issues,
so
we'd
be
in
danger
of
going
through
local
plan
review
and
submitting
a
paper
to
executive
board
that
was
already
had
elements
of
it
that
were
out
of
date.
A
So
what
I
suggest
we
do
is
that
we
defer
this
item
until
the
next
development
plan
panel,
which
will
give
officers
time
to
assess
the
guidance
that's
coming.
It
particularly
does
refer
to
our
climate
emergency
led
local
planning
review
in
in
some
detail.
So,
if
I
ask
mr
elliot,
do
you
want
to
add
some
weight
to
that?
Martin.
I
Thank
you
chair,
yes,
so
this
is
just
to
say
that,
as
members
will
recall,
there
were
a
number
of
items
to
be
considered
as
part
of
the
local
plan
update
and
one
of
the
chief
items
was
around
zero
carbon
and
standards
for
new
developments
within
leeds
and
the
role
of
the
planning
system
in
going
further
than
the
standards
set
by
national
government.
I
Now
within
the
papers
that
are
currently
part
of
the
agenda.
I
There
is
no
reflection
of
a
new
requirements
that
came
out
on
the
10th
of
february
and
those
relate
to
what
the
government
is
calling
nearly
zero
energy
buildings,
and
there
is
a
need
to
really
understand
what
that
means
and
what
the
implications
are
for
the
the
scope
of
the
local
plan
update
and
its
intended
consultation,
because,
as
members
will
be
aware,
we
do
need
to
get
these
plans
off
on
the
right
foot
so
that
they
are
de-risked
further
down
the
process.
I
And
what
we
wouldn't
want
to
do
is
go
out
to
consultation
with
something
that
wasn't
reflecting
the
latest
government
guidance.
I
So
as
as
you
say,
chair
an
opportunity
to
to
consider
the
implications
of
the
the
circular
letter
that
was
received
from
the
ministry
of
housing,
communities
and
local
government
is
is
considered
necessary
so
that
we
can
look
at
the
these
issues
in
the
round.
At
the
next
meeting.
A
Yeah
thanks
martin,
I
mean
I
I
from
the
chair.
I
strongly
suggest
we
do
this.
I
am
absolutely
love
to
submit
something,
as
this
panel
submits
something
to
executive
board
that
is
already
functionally
out
of
dating
places.
We
have
a
lot
to
do
on
this
panel.
A
Okay,
yeah
so
we'll
be
able
to
pick
things
up
for
the
one
subsequent
to
that,
so
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
this
as
chair,
I
strongly
suggest
we
do
that.
I've,
nice
indications
from
councillors,
carter
and
campbell
welcome
aboard
council
campbell
thanks
for
joining
us
council
carter.
Your
first.
F
Yes,
I
agree
with
you:
we'd
also
look
pretty
stupid
to
be
submitting
something
which
had
completely
disregarded
guidance,
which
was
it
was
imminent,
and
so
yes
you're
right.
Let's,
let's
do
the
job
right
and
take
into
account
the
most
current
government
guidance
we
have
and
and
debate
this
fully.
F
Interestingly,
at
our
briefing,
we
did
discuss
this
this
very
thing
and
make
the
points
about
precisely
what
this
meant
and
as
we
don't
as
yet
quite
know,
then
it
would
be
very
foolish
to
waste
our
time
and
effort
to
send
something
in
which
then
did
not
respond
to
the
points
raised
by
the
government.
We,
as
I
say,
we
just
look
stupid,
yep.
M
Yes,
chair,
I'm
I'm
relaxed
as
well.
I
think
the
world
seems
to
be
turning
slightly
in
relation
to
certainly
the
government's
view
on
new
developments
and
I
suppose
in
some
ways
that
should
be
welcomed
and
hopefully
we
can
keep
their
keep
their
spirits
alive.
In
this
respect,
can
I
just
say
I
I
think
yeah
I'm
happy
to
delay.
I
think
it
might
be
useful
if
somebody
could
just
produce
a
certain
sheet
of
a4
to
let
us
know
in
relation
to
the
the
latest
government.
M
A
Yeah
yeah,
no
doubt
martin
and
adam,
can
produce
that.
I
have
absolutely
no
doubt
as
a
sort
of
a
an
update
for
members.
That
would
be.
That
would
be
excellent
okay.
So
if
we
move
to
the
further
item,
can
I
have
a
chat?
Happy
seconder?
Oh
sorry,
nicole.
A
Can
I
have
a
proposal
or
a
second
from
that?
Please
emotion
that
would
defer
right.
A
Members
need
a
secondary
okay,
thank
you
and
then
a
flood
as
always,
and
then
a
flood
of
office,
so
council
grown.
Thank
you
very
much
for
that.
Okay
show
our
hands
in
favor,
see
nods
acclimations
yeah
lovely.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
we've
deferred
that
item
so
that
moves
us
on
to
the
minutes.
So
if
you
turn
to
page
seven,
I'm
not
gonna
go
through
this
page
by
page,
but
the
minutes
are
pages
seven
to
twelve.
A
I
see
no
indications
excellent.
Can
somebody
move
the
minutes
as
a
true
record
of
the
chair?
Thank
you
very
much
excellent,
see
no
dissent,
wonderful
and
I
don't
think
there's
any
matters
arising
either
is
there
looking
around
at
members
faces
excellent?
Okay,
in
that
case,
without
further
ado,
if
we
move.
A
A
L
Thank
you.
Counselor
members
will
recall
the
previous
report
to
dpp
on
the
11th
of
december,
which
presented
the
options
for
the
remittance
of
this
site
allocations
plan
following
the
outcome
of
the
legal
challenge
informed
by
an
update
the
housing
land
supply
plant
panel
were
advised
that
the
allocation
of
the
37
greenbelt
sites
affected
by
the
remittal
could
not
be
justified
for
housing
allocations
for
the
sap
plan
period.
2028
main
modifications
were
therefore
proposed
for
the
37
sites
that
none
of
the
sites
would
be
proposed
for
allocation.
The
sites
would
remain
as
green
belts.
L
This
is
option
two
of
the
three
reasonable
options
which
were
assessed
and
presented
to
dpp
in
december,
following
consideration
executive
board
on
the
16th
of
december,
the
proposed
main
modifications
were
subject
to
public
consultation
from
the
5th
of
january
to
the
16th
of
february.
The
purpose
of
the
report
presented
to
panel
today
is
to
inform
members
of
the
representations
received
to
the
proposed
main
modifications
and
the
council's
proposals
in
response.
L
The
consultation
process
was
undertaken,
reflecting
the
restrictions
applied
as
a
result
of
the
copied
pandemic
and
followed
the
conditions
set
out
in
the
government's
amended
regulations
and
the
council's
interim
statement
of
community
involvement.
Paragraph
3.1
to
3.4
of
the
report
sets
out
the
consultation
measures
undertaken.
L
L
L
The
supportive
representative
representators
comprise
members
of
the
public
community
representatives,
including
a
number
of
neighbourhood
forums
from
the
outer
areas,
as
well
as
a
number
of
local
councillors
representing
the
outer
wards.
The
objectives
to
the
council's
approach
to
retain
all
37
sites,
as
greenbeltland
were
principally
representatives
from
the
developers
and
house
builders.
L
Paragraph
3.8
3.84
sets
out
the
key
issues
raised
by
the
objectors
and
the
council's
response
to
each
in
term.
In
summary,
the
headlined
issues
raised
were
as
follows.
The
proposed
approach
doesn't
achieve
a
spatial
distribution
core
strategy.
Spatial
policy
7
is
not
delivered.
There
is
an
unbalanced
housing
supply,
with
an
over-reliance
on
brownfield
sites
in
the
city
centre
and
the
inner
area.
L
L
L
L
I
don't
propose
to
set
out
the
council's
response
to
the
issues
raised
by
these
representations,
but
we'll
be
happy
to
respond
to
any
comments.
Members
wish
to
make
about
this.
Following
this
present
presentation,
however,
I
will
refer
to
barraby
road
manson,
which
is
detailed
at
paragraph
three
3.65
to
3.84
of
the
report.
L
L
L
A
new
option.
4
has
been
assessed
to
consider
the
effects
of
the
allocation
of
the
site
for
employment
use,
which
proposes
none
of
the
37
greenbelt
sites
as
housing
allocations
in
the
sap
and
repay,
and
retain
six
of
them
as
green
belt
and
propose
that
one
site
for
general
employment
use
referenced.
L
The
assessment
has
included
a
sustainability
appraisal
which
identifies
a
positive
impact
arising
from
job
creation
and
access
to
employment.
It
has
also
been
considered
with
regard
to
the
habitat
regulations
assessment,
which
is
detailed
at
paragraph
3.89,
which
requires
an
update
of
the
hra
addendum
subject
to
consultation
with
natural
england.
L
It
is
considered
that
the
significant
deficit
in
employment
land
represents
exceptional
circumstances
for
the
release
of
the
land
from
the
green
belt.
To
address
this
change,
main
modification
8
will
be
retained
with
the
effect
of
deleting
the
site
from
policy
hg2,
as
there
are
no
exceptional
circumstances
to
justify
releasing
any
of
the
site
for
housing.
L
L
The
essay
addendum
has
been
subsequently
been
revised
to
include
the
assessment
of
option
four,
including
baraby
road,
so
in
conclusion,
having
considered
the
representations
submitted,
it
is
therefore
recommended
that,
aside
from
the
additional
main
modification
number
39
for
the
allocation
of
baraboolo
arabi
lane
manson
for
general
employment,
no
changes
are
necessary
to
those
agreed.
Consultation
by
executive
board
on
the
16th
of
december
panel
are
therefore
requested
to
consider
the
recommendations
set
out
at
paragraph
2.2
of
the
report.
A
A
year
into
this
colleagues
a
year
and
you'd
think
honestly
at
school
for
the
gifted
moment
anyway,
what
I
was
saying
was
how
comprehensive
your
report
was.
Thank
you
very
much
for
that.
It's
really
useful,
especially
because
we've
given
that
we've
given
you
members
and
it's
a
good
aid
memoir
for
for
all
of
the
members
of
the
panel.
If
folks
can
recall
this
is,
with
the
exception
of
the
the
one
change
that
janet's
just
gone
through,
and
this
is
in
accord
with
what
we've
discussed
previously.
So
I'm
in
favor
of
the
proposed
change.
A
F
Thank
you
thank
you,
chair
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
on
at
length
on
this.
As
you
rightly
say,
we've
discussed
it
over
and
over
again
we
shall
be
voting
in
favor
of
the
submission
to
retain
the
sites
in
the
green
belt.
As
you
would
expect,
however,
we
will
reserve
our
position
on
39.
F
F
We
will
support,
however,
the
return
of
all
the
other
sites
to
the
green
belt.
Just
I
want
to
make
the
point
about
the
builders
comments.
F
You
know
we
don't
need
reminding
that
the
the
legal
challenge
brought
by
the
aberra
community
group
resulted
in
a
high
court
judge
saying
that
the
exceptional
arguments
by
the
council
to
build
on
these
green
belt
sites
had
not
been
made,
which
we
of
course
said
all
along
that's
the
opposition
and
for
the
for
the
builders.
F
Then,
in
these
brief
paragraphs-
and
I
do
thank
johnny's
for
a
very
clear,
very
clear
appraisal
of
the
report
to
say
the
half-baked
and
half-hearted
the
building,
fraternities
objections
to
the
return
of
these
to
the
green
belt
would
be,
I
think,
to
understate
it.
The
very
fact
that
they
then
go
on
to
single
out
certain
particular
sites
which
happen
to
be
the
ones
where
they
would
probably
generate
the
most
value
for
the
for
the
speculative
house.
F
Builders
rather
gives
the
game
away,
they're
the
first
to
go
to
law
when
a
decision
goes
against
them
and
it's
interesting
that
they
seem
to
have
completely
disregarded
the
fact
that
a
high
court
judge
has
said
quite
clearly
that
the
exceptional
circumstances
for
the
release
of
these
sites
from
the
green
belt
for
building
has
simply
not
been
made
so
entirely
right.
F
A
Well,
there
is
there
is
there
is
a
value
in
brevity?
Isn't
there?
After
all,
I
would
point
out,
though,
the
I
got
just
found
the
planning
inspectors
at
fault
rather
than
the
the
council
itself.
A
I
think
we're
broadly
in
a
card
of
the
outcome.
If
perhaps
we
differ
in
some
detail
on
the
journey
andrew,
I
think
it
would
be
best
to
suggest.
However,
your
position
is
noted.
I
I'm
conscious
of
the
way
I'm
keenly
aware
that
this
panel
over
the
last
couple
years
has
raised
the
deficit
in
employment
land
on
numerous
occasions,
including,
I
think
myself
on
a
number
of
occasions
so-
and
I
think
it's
been
raised
by
members
from
across
across
the
council
chamber,
the
other
deficit
in
employment
land.
A
So
this
goes
some
way
to
rectify
that.
So
I
think
it's
a
it's
a
pragmatic
move
and
I
I'll
be
supporting
it
from
the
chair,
but
obviously
we
want
to
have
further
quest
further
debate
before
we
move
to
to
the
recommendations
that
janet's
pointed
out
are
on
page
five
of
your
additional
document
and
so
council
campbell
you're
next.
M
Well,
just
quickly,
if
you
reiterate
a
lot
of
andrew's
points,
I
don't
think
certainly
on
record.
We've
always
said
that
we're
not
sure
about
whether
the
green
belt
sites
were
needed.
We
proved
right
thanks
to
ebra
and
to
remove
them
from
the
green
belt.
Sorry
from
the
housing
allocation
and
put
them
back
in
green
belt
seemed
sensible
to
us,
and
we
support
that.
M
I
I
am
I'm
slightly
torn
on
barbie,
because
it
I
just
wonder
because
it
it
was
in
effect,
lumped
in
with
the
the
greenbelt
sites
that
the
inspector
sorry,
the
the
judge
in
effect
referred
to,
whether
this
doesn't
actually
somewhat
preclude
our
ability
to
take
this
particular
one
out
of
the
green
belt.
M
I
I
understand
there
is
pressure
for
employment
land.
There
is
significant
pressure
across
all
of
the
city.
Quite
frankly,
and
so
I
I
am
sort
of
half
inclined
to
support
this
wondered
perhaps
if
it
might
be
appropriate
to
push
it
towards
the
end
of
the
plan
period
with
a
view
to
actually
producing
some
solid
evidence
that
it's
really
needed
in
that
location.
At
that
time,
okay,.
A
Yeah
yeah
thanks.
It's
an
interesting
suggestion,
to
which
I
will
turn
to
our
extremely
accomplished
officers
for
commentary
on,
because
I'm
not
sure
about
in
terms
of
phasing
with
regards
to
this
one
site,
janet
martin,
what's
the
story
there.
K
My
hand,
sorry
sorry,
sorry,
I
missed
that
apology.
No,
it's
fine!
I
think,
as
I
think
panel
will
we
we
removed
kind
of
the
notion
of
phasing
as
it
related
to
housing
through
the
through
the
examination.
There's
nothing
within
the
course
strategy
and
paul
bingham
will
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
here,
but
there's
nothing
within
the
core
strategy
that
suggests
that
there
should
be
a
phasing
approach
to
the
allocation
of
employment
land.
K
So
I
don't
think
there
is
necessarily
a
policy
hook
for
us
to
base
such
a
phasing
approach
on,
I
think
as
well.
We
recognize
that
there
is
more
evidence,
that's
going
to
be
required
as
we
when
we
submit
the
the
information
to
the
inspectors
at
the
inspector,
rather
in
terms
of
the
the
soundness
of
this
approach
and
particularly
as
it
relates
the
detailed
supply
evidence
that
would
justify
the
release
of
this
site.
So
we're
we're
working
on
that
at
the
moment.
K
The
headlines
are
obviously
captured
in
the
report
that
we
have
this
53
hectare
deficiency
and
that's
on
the
basis
of
up-to-date
monitoring
and
the
impacts
of
of
hs2
and
the
loss
of
this
site.
Should
it
be
lost
from
from
the
plan?
K
K
It's
our
interpretation
of
the
judgment
that
it
is,
but
I
guess
clearly
the
inspectors
will
have.
The
inspector
will
have
the
right
through
the
examination,
to
to
question
that
and
and
to
see
whether
that
that
is
or
not,
but
we'll
obviously
be
presenting
the
most
up-to-date
evidence
to
justify
that
position.
Should
it
be
supported
by
executive
board
and
full
council.
A
I
Yeah
chair
just
to
say
that
page
396,
which
is
a
long
way
down
the
paper,
as
I
admit,
but
this
this
is
a
background
paper
which
supports
the
submission
material
to
the
inspector,
and
there
is
a
section
there,
section
13,
which
goes
through
the
the
justification
for
this
site.
And
importantly,
it
distinguishes
this
site
from
the
other
36.
I
So
officers
have
considered
very
seriously
that
this
does
not
present
a
risk
to
the
position
which
was
agreed
by
this
panel.
An
executive
board
yeah
in
terms
of
the
other
36
sites,
and
it
is
clearly
distinguishable
and
13.2,
is
the
power
that
that
sets
out
sort
of
what
adam's
just
said
really,
so
that
the
inspector's
very
clear
as
to
what
the
council's
position
is
on
that.
A
Okay
yeah.
If
colleagues
could
cast
an
eye
of
us
on
396
section,
13
13.2,
I
mean
on
that
basis,
I'm
certainly
content.
We
accept
the
proposals
if
any,
while
people
are
sort
of
doing
that,
I'll.
A
Fill
two
minutes
of
dead
air,
while
people
check
review
refresh
that
paragraph,
but
I
mean,
if
members
are
content
with
that,
then
we
could
move
to
just
look
at
the
proposals
that
we,
the
section
two
on
page,
a
mere
page
5
of
your
main
report.
I'm
sorry
the
additional
item
report,
which
we've
we
need
to
we've
noted
the
report
we've
examined
report
debated
the
report.
We
need
to
recommend
to
executive
board
that
we
accept
for
the
report
and
all
members
are
in
favor
of
the
removal
of
sites
council
cartel
wants
to
reserve.
A
E
Okay,
yes,
just
given
the
the
specific
comments
of
members
come,
can
we
move
the
motion
to
of
the
recommendations
or
an
amended
one
so
that
those
members
are
not
that
are
not
fully
happy?
Can
either
abstain
or
vote
against
the
motion.
A
F
A
M
Colin,
can
I
suggest,
then,
to
help
andrew
myself
that
we
prefer
we
could
have
an
amendment
which
basically
says
we
accept
the
removal
of
all
the
greenbelt
cells
and
and
except
what's
it
39
baraby
lane,
and
we
could
vote
on
the
two
separately
and
then
there
could
be.
There
could
be
account.
Another
proposal
which
is
effective,
sensible
included,
I'll
move.
A
H
H
Is
the
motion
on
it
in
its
own
right,
because
that
that's
the
main
change?
Isn't
it
to
this
from
the
last
page
for
sure
similar
lines
to
counselor
camera
support.
But
of
course,
you've
got
the
issue
where
counselor
kenneth
mckenna
has
already
moved
that
motion.
Hasn't
he
but
I'll
leave
you
with
sort
that
out,
while
your
internet's
still
on.
A
D
A
Yeah
but
now
but
that's
come
after
councilwood.
Thank
you
very
much,
council
brooke,
but
that's
come
after
the
proposal
and
the
second
for
the
amended
motion
that
councillors,
campbell
and
carter
have
come
up
with
so
before
we
do.
F
Sure
my
motion
did
come
first,
but
if
it
if
it
resolves
the
issue,
I'm
quite
happy
to
go
along
with
councillor
campbell's
suggestion,
I'm
in
favor
of
the
resolution
as
it
stands,
but
I
colin's
resolution
will
re
will
reflect
what
I
can
vote
for
and
it
allows
council
carter
and
campbell
to
do
what
they
wish
in
the
circumstances.
E
Thanks
chair,
so
so
the
recommendations
are
as
written
are,
for
all
the
main
modifications
to
be
to
be
proposed
to
executive
board
for
for
approval.
So
there's
two
things
that
we
could
do.
We
could
either
move
the
recommendations
as
councilor
mckenna
had.
E
I
appreciate
that
wasn't
seconded
and
make
very
clear
in
the
minutes
in
any
event
of
this,
of
this
meeting,
the
specific
views
of
councillor
campbell
and
councillor
carter,
but
then
book
but
move
as
as
set
out
in
the
report
or
take
the
alternative
motion
which
is
would
would
need
to
read
that
that
development
plans
panel
was
proposing
that
executive
board
approved
the
recommendations
of
the
first
lot
of
main
modifications,
but
not
necessarily
in
relation
to
the
barrier
lane
site
correct.
E
E
Remember
the
motion
is
amend
and
the
recommendation,
and
so
members
would
need
to
vote
on
that.
So
if
those
members
such
as
council
mckenna,
who
has
indicated
that
he
was,
is
happy
with
the
recommendations
as
proposed,
he
would
not
be
voting
in
favor
of
that
unless
he
changes
his
mind
in
the
in
the
interim,
because
it
is
an
amended
recommendation
which
says
yes
to
the
keep
the
housing
sites
in
the
green
belt
and
no
to
allocating
the
employment
site.
E
That
motion's
been
moved
and
seconded
now.
So
that's
the
one
that
people
need
to
take
the
vote
on
unless
councillor,
campbell
and
and
counselor
carter
want
to
withdraw
that
motion
and
and
go
with
the
other
option.
A
It
seems
to
be
the
case
right
that
all
the
members
on
this
panel
want
to
vote
to
remove
the
all,
but
one
of
the
sides
from
the
green
belt
right
then
I
suggest
all
but
three
members
of
this
panel
and
one
undecided
want
to
have
the
mx238
as
an
employment
side,
rather
remove
the
group
right
and
then
council
campbell's,
yet
to
make
up
his
mind,
I'm
not
I'm
not
being
sarcastic
collin.
I
just
think
that's
your
position.
Sorry.
A
I
have
a
tone
in
my
voice
every
day,
so
so
there's
it
doesn't
seem
much
value
in
having
emotion
that
causes
confusion
on
this
when
it
seems
to
be
quite
simple,
so
I've
got
council
campbell
and
councillor
riches
with
their
hands
up
so
councillor
campbell
first.
M
A
M
One
of
which
effectively
is
the
officer's
recommendation
insofar
as
it
first
to
1-38.
I
think
it
is
yeah
and
then
a
separate
resolution
which
refers,
which
I'm
assuming
that
somebody
on
your
side
will
propose,
which
include
which
specifically
referred
to
barobi
lane,
at
which
point
councillor
carter
and
anybody
else,
and
ourselves
could
either
vote
for
again
startup
state.
F
M
M
A
E
M
E
A
H
Reiterate
the
point
that
I
made
five
minutes
ago,
which
councillor
campbell's
effectively
just
repeated,
so
I
don't
if
no
one
were
listening
to
me
or
what,
because
I
clearly
said
two
resolutions.
However,
since
then
nicole
has
kindly
explained
why
we
can't
do
that.
So
personally,
I
think
we
should
go
to
the
original
motion
vote
on
that
and
then
the
minutes
can
reflect
councillor
campbell's,
certainly
councillor
carter's
comments
and
anybody
else
yeah
it's
councillor
campbell's
as
well,
because
I
think
it's
important.
H
I
I
support
modification
39
and
I
want
that
to
be
reflected.
I'm
not
sure
that
the
amendment
clearly
reflected
that.
So
that's
my
position,
but
if
we
want
to
play
it
back,
I'm
pretty
certain.
I
did
suggest
two
modif
two
separate
resolutions.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
the
council
richie,
that's
helpful.
I've
got
council
anderson.
A
F
F
I
cannot
believe
that
about
a
committee
of
councillors
cannot
alter
officer
recommendations
as
they
wish
it
does
not
hold
water
and
therefore
to
say
that
we
want
to
amend
the
recommendations,
so
we
vote
for
or
against
1-38
and
then
a
separate
vote
on
39,
which
gives
those
in
favor
and
those
against
the
opportunity
of
voting
it
just
it.
Well,
I've
never
heard
a
ruling
like
that
that
you,
we
can't
amend
an
officer
recommendation
as
we
see
fit.
E
Sorry,
just
to
clarify,
I
didn't
say
just
to
clarify
for
members
understanding,
I'm
not
suggesting
that
you
can't
amend
an
office
of
recommendation.
Of
course
you
can,
that
can
be
done
at
all
times
is
often
done
at
plans
panels.
What
I'm
saying
is
it
would
need
to
be.
It
would
need
to
be
moved
as
one
recommendation,
so
you
would
be
amending
the
recommendation,
but
it's
one
motion
as
to
what
you
wanted
to
say.
E
So,
your
recommendation,
sorry,
your
motion,
counselor
carter,
which
has
been
seconded
so
unless
it's
withdrawn,
would
need
to
be
voted
on.
Is
that
that
recommendation
is
amended
to
read
panel,
so
the
vote
would
be
panel
agrees
with
the
first
main
modifications,
but
does
not
agree
in
relation
to
the
barrel,
relaying
modification.
E
That
is
what
members
will
need
to
vote
on
unless
that,
unless
that
amendment
is
withdrawn,
so
you
have
amended
the
recommendation.
That's
entirely,
like
you
say,
within
your
gift
to
do
so.
It
doesn't
end
up
with
two
resolutions.
It
ends
up
with
one
resolution,
but
members
need
to
be
clear
about
what
that
amended
recommendation
is,
and
that
is
that
you
vote
not
to
support
the
employment
site.
A
A
Gosh
we
have
complicated
something
rather
easy.
Haven't
we
okay?
So
unless
that,
unless
that
motions
we've
drawn
councillor
campbell,
then
we're
gonna
have
to
take
a
vote
on
that.
M
So
if
the
emotion
reads,
in
effect,
we
accept
one
to
38
but
not
39,
then
we've
been
pushed
into
a
position
where
either
you
bought
four
or
against
the
38
and,
as
I
say
it
just
seems
such
a
simple.
M
M
We
if
you
think
about
the
budget
debate
last
week
where,
on
39
occasions,
I
voted
on
effectively
a
split
recommendation
in
relation
to
the
budget.
You
may
have
lost
interest
in
the
will
to
live
at
that
point,
but
certainly
we
could.
We
appear
to
be
able
to
split
up
budget
resolutions,
for
example
on
full
council
to
their
component
parts.
Why
can't
we
do
it
yeah?
I
I
understand
that
we've
been
pushed
into
it.
A
Yeah,
okay,
I
I
have
a
lot
of
sympathy
for
that
colin.
I
really
do.
I've
got
two
more
members
indicating
they're
wanting
to
speak
so
council
college.
Then
council
grew
in.
G
D
At
the
late
item
document,
where
the
recommendations
are,
it
says
and
recommends
to
council
that
it
a
approves
the
proposed
39
million
modifications
to
the
remit,
part
of
the
site.
A
D
B
E
Chair,
I
think
I
think
it's
about
it's
about
recommendations,
motions
and
resolutions,
so.
E
Is
the
vote
on
the
motion?
Isn't
it?
But
the
motion
doesn't
have
to
fully
reflect
a
recommendation
because,
as
councilor
carter
points
out,
you
can
members
can
move
an
amended
recommendation.
That
recommendation
is
there
from
offices
as
a
starting
point
which
members
may
choose
to
move
as
a
whole
or
move
as
amended.
So
counselor
carter
has
moved
an
amended
recommendation,
which
is
an
entirely
acceptable,
but
but
members
need
to
fully
understand
what
they
are.
They
are
then
voting
on,
and
that
is
that
amendment,
the
only
other
matter.
E
The
only
other
way
I
could
suggest
is
if
we
is,
if
a
motion
is
moved
for
members
to
vote
on
that
site
of
the
employment
site,
and
if
that
is
carried
that
becomes
part
of
the
substantive
motion.
If
it's
not
carried,
then
you
can
move
move
a
further
emotion
to
accept
the
recommendations
as
written,
but
in
any
circumstances
the
minutes
can
still
fully
reflect
the
views
of
councillor
carter
and
councillor
campbell.
F
Yeah,
I'm
sorry
I'm
sorry
to
prolong
the
agony
with
this,
but
that
just
confuses
matters
even
more.
Would
it
be
easier
if
somebody
was
to
move
a
straightforward
resolution
that
we
adopt
the
recommendations
between
one
and
38
and
then
somebody,
and
so
that
becomes
a
matter
for
voting
all
those
in
favor
then
vote
in
favor
of
it,
which
is
probably
all
of
us,
and
then
we
vote
on
39,
in
which
case
those
in
favor
of
39
can
vote
in
favor
which
councillor
richie
wanted
it
to
be
clear.
F
He
wanted
to
do,
and
I
agree
with
him,
and
those
of
us
who
want
to
vote
against,
are
abstain
on
39
can
do
so.
It's
absolutely
crystal
clear,
then,
who
has
voted
for
what
and
and
with
your
respect,
nicole,
you
get
you're,
making
it
more
confused
as
you
go
on.
A
It's
a
set
of
recommendations,
it's
a
proposal
from
members,
it's
to
me
as
chair.
It
seems
perfectly
reasonable.
It's
been
suggested
now
by
members
from
if
you
like,
both
sides
of
the
aisle
so
to
speak.
I
can't
see
anything
wrong
with
that.
So
if
a
member
was
to
to
move
that
council
college,
is
that
a
historical
hand
or
is
that
a
new
hand.
B
It's
the
new
one,
because
I
want
to
propose
that
we
vote
on
motions
one
two
38.
A
Hallelujah
praise
be:
can
someone
second
that
please
I'll
second,
that
thank
you
castle
carter
good
to
see
partisan
corporation
in
the
dpp
and
then
can
someone
propose
that
we
vote
separately
on
39.
A
A
Hallelujah
wow
well
well,
folks,
I'm
just
glad
yet
once
again
that
we
could
demonstrate
to
the
people
of
leeds
live
on
youtube,
that
we
are
not
for
nothing
but
a
details.
Council.
Thank
you
very
much
and
the
amount
of
weight
and
import
we
put
to
these
things
is
incredible
and
I
kind
of
think
that's
a
good
thing.
By
and
large,
I
really
do
so.
A
The
first
resolution
was
the
first
motion
rather
was
that
we
vote
in
on
items
1
to
38,
which
is
decides
to
be
moved
from
green
belt.
Now,
in
terms
of
voting,
I
have
to
go
through
you
all
one
by
one.
I
think
nicole
is
nodding,
so
bear
with
me.
While
I
bring
up
my
highly
exciting
alphabetical
list,
are
we
all
clear
on
what
we're
voting
for
yeah?
We
are
good
councilor
anderson.
A
E
A
Thank
you,
councillor
campbell
support
chair
councillor
carter
in
favor,
councillor,
collins,.
F
A
Right
so
then,
the
second
motion
is
the
vote
on
site
39,
which
is
the
site
to
retained
as
mixed
employment,
which
we've
discussed
at
length.
So
we're
going
to
vote
on
that.
So
councillor
anderson,
abstain,
councillor
brooks.
D
A
This
is
to
retain
site
mx238,
which
is,
which
is
item
39
in
the
additional
recommendations,
rather
than
returning
to
greenbelt,
to
have
it
as
a
mixed-use
employment
site.
Given
that.
A
E
E
B
A
A
I
think
that's
everything
on
this
item.
I'm
looking
to
nicole
she's,
not
shaking
the
head
vigorously,
good,
excellent
right.
Thank
you
very
much
for
that.
Colleagues,
we
got
there
in
the
end.
We
are,
as
I
said
before
on
many
occasions,
a
details
council.
So
if
you
could
turn
to
our
next
item,
which,
as
we're
not
doing
the
local
plan
review
for
obviously
sensible
reasons,
we're
going
straight
over
to
it's
item
nine
and
it's
page
145
and
the
initial
document-
and
so
this
is
the
discovery
quantitation.
G
Thank
you
chair
just
make
a
point
just
to
clarify
that
this
is
a
joint
report
with
my
colleague,
caroline
harris,
who
is
on
the
who
is
on
the
on
the
call
and
will
be
covering
parts
of
parts
of
the
consultation
too.
So
this
consultation
is
by
central
government
and
is
proposing
to
make
changes
to
the
mppf
and
the
national
model
design
code.
I've
got
that
in
the
right
order
and
the
pilot
code
that
goes
with
it
just
put
some
context
for
you.
G
This
follows
on
from
the
building
better
building
beautiful
commission
living
with
beauty
report
which
emphasizes
asking
for
beauty
and
refusing
ugliness
with
a
number
of
recommendations.
But
those
are
the
key
points
in
the
context
of
this
consultation,
and
it's
also
with
the
government's
planning
white
paper
consultation,
which
is
now
closed
on
planning
for
the
future,
which
was
presented
to
development
plans
panel
on
the
13th
of
october
2020,
and
they
said
21,
then
apologies
the
presentation.
G
G
G
Clarity
is
is
provided.
That
bump
is
not
well
designed
and
should
be
refused,
especially
when
it
does
not
reflect
the
national
or
local
design
codes.
And
I
think
this
is
a
positive
thing.
G
The
change
is
always
proposed
with
reference
to
the
role
of
neighborhood
planning
groups,
not
just
neighborhood
planning
areas
and
in
develop,
and
this
is
all
key
in
developing
local
design.
Guidance
changes
also
emphasize
on
the
importance
of
good
design,
as
are
supported,
but
in
the
amended
text.
The
words
beauty
and
beautiful
have
been
inserted,
which
raises
concerns
regarding
their
objectivity,
meaning
different
things
to
different
people
and
whether
or
not
it
could
cause
more
work
than
not,
and
that
great
chemistry
should
be
placed
on
making
on
making
this
more
essentially
achieving
well-placed
designs.
G
In
terms
of
in
paragraph
3.8
onwards,
achieving
sustainable
development,
a
key
change
in
the
wording
of
presumption
in
favor
of
sustained
development
has
made
reference
to
the
importance
of
infrastructure
and
climate
change,
climate
change,
which
is
fully
supported,
and
the
word
under
the
actual
paragraph
in
the
mppf
states.
It
now
includes
a
requirement.
G
All
plans
should
promote
a
sustainable
pattern
of
development
that
seeks
to
meet
the
development
needs
of
their
area,
align
growth
and
infrastructure,
improve
the
environment,
mitigate
climate
change
brackets,
including
by
making
effective
use
of
land
in
urban
areas
and
adapt
to
its
effects.
This
gives
much
more
significant
weight
to
sustainability
and
climate
change
through
the
planning
process.
However,
it's
thought
this
could
be
considered
that
this
could
be
made
much
stronger
and
clearer
by
using
the
words,
deliver
or
ensure
sustainable
development,
and
rather
than
seeking
to
mitigate
it,
should
be
maximized
to
address
climate
change
issues.
G
In
regard
to
paragraph
311
flood
risk
management,
the
text
now
recognizes
sequential
tests
taken
to
count
all
sorts
of
flood
risk
and
that
the
local
plumbing
authority
applied
natural
flooding
management
techniques
to
reduce
causes
and
impacts
of
flooding
do
an
integrated
approach.
This
is
a
positive
thing,
but
we
think
that
might
create
some
technicalities
and
sharing
of
information
with
other
stakeholders,
which
is
what
we
need.
Further
clarification
on.
G
The
flood
risk
vulnerability.
Classification
now
forms
part
of
the
mppf,
not
as
it
was
in
the
nppg,
so
it
gives
it
significantly
more
weight
here.
The
intention
of
giving
more
weight
is
to
be
stated
with
the
flood.
Risk
is
fully
supported,
but
there
are
considered
to
be
some
practical
difficulties
and
further
guidance
and
clarity
is
required,
for
example,
the
relative
preference
between
sites
with
surface
water
flooding
versus
sites
with
the
groundwater
flooding.
G
It's
also
added
that
buildings
is
required,
that
buildings
are
brought
back
into
use
with
minimal
refurbishment
and
should
be
resilient
resistant
and
resilient,
but
this
depends
on
the
quality
of
materials.
How
we
take
that
form
that
should
be
fundamentally
part
of
the
planning
process
and
we
use
something
we're
involved
in
in
paragraph
3.13,
article
4
directions.
G
There
is
a
significant
additional
text,
additional
text
curbing
the
use
of
article
4's
and
they've,
given
us
two
options
to
look
at,
and
one
is
that
we
should
stick
such
directions
for
change
of
use
to
residential
residential
situations
where
there
is
essential
to
avoid
highly
unacceptable
adverse
impacts
or
be
limited
to
situations
where
this
is
necessary
in
order
to
protect
an
interest
of
national
significance.
In
all
cases,
additional
texts
he's
also
proposed
that
it
would
limit
article
falls
to
the
smallest
geographical
area
possible.
G
This,
I'm
sure,
is
raising
significant
concerns,
as
leeds
is
very
active
in
using
articles
falls,
especially
with
regards
to
change
of
use
of
dwellings
to
housing,
multiple
occupation.
The
further
curbing
raises
potential
implications,
for
example
on
our
town
and
local
centers.
If
we
are
able
to
manage
conversions
to
residential
and
which
are
now
allowed
under
the
new
government
permitted
development
rights,
it
is
vital
that
the
rpas
have
the
have
the
the
control
locally
on
planning
issues
through
the
through
the
use
of
article
stores
right.
G
N
I
mean
much
of
it
is
familiar
territory
and
leads.
As
your
members
will
be
aware,
we've
got
a
range
of
design
guidance
documents
in
place
from
the
sort
of
city-wide
neighborhoods
for
living,
which
covers
residential
development
to
more
sort
of
topic,
specific
guidance
such
as
that
on
tall
buildings,
and
we
also
have
a
number
of
site-specific
guidance
or
master
plans
and
being
prepared.
So
it's
not
it's
not
new
to
leeds
to
have
good
design
guidance
in
place,
and
I
think
much
of
what
it's
saying,
really
sort
of
re-emphasizes.
N
I
think
particularly
what
it
suggests
is
that
you
would
take
a
sort
of
an
area
typology
based
approach
to
preparing
design
guidance
which
would
look
at
the
inner
city
suburbs,
for
example,
and
prepare
design
guidance
for
for
those,
but
clearly
in
a
diverse
urban
area
such
as
leeds
an
inner
city
area
type
covers
a
wide
variety
of
areas,
and
I
think
this
needs
to
be
a
greater
recognition
of
that
and
actually
what?
What
level
is
it
most
appropriate
to
have
have
guidance
and
design
design
codes?
N
I
think
also
there's
no
section
within
a
draft
model
design
code
on
on
climate
change,
which
I
think
we
feel
is
a
real
missed
opportunity
and
something
which
should
be
brought
into
greater
focus
at
the
sort
of
national
level
through
this
design
guidance.
Similarly,
also
some
matters
where
yeah.
Yes,
sorry
about
that
simulate
the
source.
N
Yes,
I
can
see
thank
you
and
there's
also
some
instances
where
it
shows
designs
which
we
wouldn't
be
appropriating,
or
we
wouldn't
necessarily
promote
in
leeds
and
and
there's
also
some
instances
where
it
suggests
that
some
elements
wouldn't
be
essential
as
design
guns,
which
I
think
we'd
consider
were
sort
of
very
important
and
we
we'd
look
to
consciousness
and
fitness
should
be
are
really
very
important
issues
to
address.
N
Sorry,
I've
completely
lost
my
training
to
you,
but
I
think
also
it's
it's.
I
think
it's
also
very
important
to
sort
of
make
the
point.
I
think,
in
our
response
back
to
government
that,
whilst
having
good
design
guidance,
it
is
it's
very
important.
It's
not
alone,
it's
not
going
to
solve
all
the
issues
that
the
challenges
that
we
do
face
when
trying
to
achieve
good
design
on
sites
and
issues
such
as
viability,
for
example,
and
that
sort
of
whole
place
approach,
is
really
needed
to
planning
design
delivery
and
funding.
N
They're
offering
50
000
pounds
to
support
us
to
you
know
have
it
have
a
go
sort
of
test
testing
out
different
parts
of
the
of
of
the
approach
that
it
suggests
and
our
bid
focuses
on
looking
at
that
sort
of
area
type
approach
and
how
that
works
in
a
sort
of
diverse
city
such
as
leeds
and
how
you
involve
communities
in
in
that
process,
and
we
had
been
advised
that
successful
bids
would
be
announced
on
yesterday
on
monday,
but
due
to
the
high
levels
of
interest,
we've
now
been
told
that
that's
been
pushed
back
until
next
week.
N
G
I
do
it's
not
very
good
at
meeting
just
to
sort
of
thanks,
caroline,
just
to
conclude
that
there
are.
There
is
general
support
for
the
proposed
changes
in
the
mppf
and
we
think
it
has
taken
on
board
some
of
the
some
other,
the
response
that
we
provided
in
october.
However,
we
do
feel
that
it's
a
missed
opportunity
not
just
to
review
the
whole
document,
because
there
are
links
to
other
sections
like,
for
example,
regarding
car
parking
and
the
dominance
of
that,
and
things
like
that,
specifically
with
climate
change.
G
Obviously,
we
raised
concern
about
the
article
four.
The
word
I
didn't
get
out
was
our
ability
to
to
be
able
to
control
this
to
our
local
local
issues,
but
I
think
the
key
part
is
also
that
seeks
the
strengthening
of
the
words
and
clarity
on
wording
and
putting
more
emphasis
on
to
do
not
just
you
know
wishing
in
a
way
yeah.
So
we
hope
that
those
are
the
key
points
that
hopefully,
we've
picked
up
for
you
in
the
report.
G
The
next
steps,
obviously,
following
today,
taking
on
board
your
responses
and
comment
detail
response
will
be
provided
to
the
executive
member
for
climate
change,
transport
and
sustainable
development,
because
the
final
comments,
formal
comments,
is
saturday,
the
27th
of
march
2021,
that's
it
chair.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Sarah
caroline
councillor,
hayden,
is
getting
a
crash
course
in
the
time
scales
that
mcclug
subjected
to
at
all
times,
so
just
I've
got
loads
of
members
want
to
speak
I'll,
bring
you
all
in.
I
just
want
to
say
it
for
himself.
Yeah
climate
climate
climate
is
so
absent
from
this
and
there's
so
much
wiggle
room,
and
if
you
couple
this
with
the
the
just
recent
issued
letter
regarding
almost
climate,
almost
carbon
neutral
homes,
it
really
really
just
sell,
set
a
really
large
alarm
bells
ringing
with
myself.
A
I
can't
help
but
think
that
almost
zero
card
was
a
phrase
that
somebody
dreamt
up.
A
minister
or
an
advisor
dreamt
up
just
after
persimmon
had
gone
off
the
phone
to
them
in
their
latest
lobbying
exercise.
I'm
really
concerned
about
that.
A
It
boosts
me
to
say
at
the
moment
that
stuff
we
build
stuff
that
is
being
built
across
the
country.
At
the
moment,
it's
going
to
need
retrofitting
really
quickly
to
make
it
carbon
to
make
it
zero
carbon,
which
so
it
an
mppf,
is
a
really
fairly
quick
and
easy
way.
A
changing
government
policy
that
doesn't
need
a
whole
lot
of
rig
role
in
in
terms
of
parliament
and
we're
going
through
this
incredibly
rigorous
and
and
very
detailed
local
plan
review.
A
Well,
that
could
be
greatly
aided
by
the
government
changing
the
mppf,
which
I
can
do
really
easily
so
for
myself,
very
much
climate
climate,
climate
now
and
obviously
being
a
heading
in
high
park
council.
I
am
concerned
about
the
the
curtailing
and
muzzling
somewhat
of
of
article
4
directions.
A
So
those
few
comments
from
myself
I
got
it
was
councillor
hayden,
then
councillor
brooks
then
councillor
anderson,
then
councillor
richie
and
then
council
mckenna.
So
councillor,
hayden
and
councilor
brooks.
D
I
just
want
to
say
to
caroline
how
beautifully
you
handled
what
is
becoming
a
kind
of
like
occupational
hazard,
and
I
would
have
completely
I
would
not
have
been
able
to
articulate
all
that
you
did
whilst
dealing
with,
obviously
a
small
childhood.
You
know
so
well
done
and
I
feel
your
pain.
I
was
chairing
a
meeting
my
last
west
yorkshire
just
last
week
when
my
son
is
having
a
meltdown
over
his
maths.
So
it's
it's
yeah.
N
D
Cheers
chair,
I'm
afraid,
he's
gonna
have
to
bear
with
me,
because
this
is
my
first
meeting
and
I'm
trying.
But
if
there's
a
load
of
stuff,
that's
already
been
covered
in
other
meetings,
then
please,
just
let
me
know
so
I
mean
this
there's
this
this
load
of
stuff
about
beauty.
I
mean
art,
students
up
and
down
the
country
debate.
What
beauty
is
like,
probably
every
day
with
glass
of
wine
in
hand,
it's
it's
something
that
is
completely
impossible
to
pin
down.
D
So
I
mean
from
from
what
I'm
getting
from
the
papers.
It
seems
that
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
pin
it
down
as
being
design
is
beauty
which
I
think
I
think
is
a
lot
more
tangible
and
a
lot
more
helpful.
So
I'm
really
in
favor
of
like
like
you,
chair,
I've
got
I've
got
some
concerns
around
the
article
for
directions
and
I'd
like
to
put
that
sort
of
on
on
record.
For
similar
similar
reasons.
D
I
think
that
hmos
are
a
wonderful
things
for
low-cost
housing,
but
when
there
are
a
high
consul
concentration
in
an
area
like
in
my
ward
and
I
know
ward,
it
can
really
have
a
really
adverse
impact,
and
so
that's
very
very
concerning
to
me,
with
regards
to
this
community
engagement,
the
mention
of
community
engagement.
D
What
sort
of
shape
would
that
take?
I
know
I
know
you
mentioned
that
there's
going
to
be
50
000
pounds
potentially
to
to
develop
that,
and
how
would
that
then
tie
in
with
neighborhood
plans
as
well,
because,
obviously,
a
lot
of
our
residents
across
the
city
have
put
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
into
developing
neighbourhood
plans
and
I'd
just
like
to
see
how
all
that
can
can
tie
together.
A
Yep
thanks
for
that
officers,
we
got
our
dean
council
brooke's
comments.
Caroline
yeah.
N
Yeah,
I
think
neighbour
planning
fits
in
really
well
into
the
sort
of
the
sort
of
the
design,
coding
and
design
guidance
side
of
things.
I
think
the
when
you
look
at
the
document.
N
I
think
it.
You
know
you'll,
possibly
be
aware
that
we've
already
got
sort
of
guidance
for
neighbourhood
plans
on
how
they
can
sort
of
look
at
design
through
the
neighborhood
planning
process,
because
I
think
it's
something
that
nearly
all,
I
think
well
in
fact
all
of
the
neighborhood
planning
groups,
something
which
that
which
they're
interested
in,
but
they
have
perhaps
found
in
the
past.
It's
difficult
to
difficult
to
know
exactly
what
what
to
do
so.
N
N
You
know,
there's
an
offer
of
money
and
a
request
offers
to
test
the
design
code,
but
not
necessarily
clarity
on
exactly
what
they
were
wanting
people
to
look
at
or
to
do,
but
I
suspect,
if
we
are
successful
in
the
bidding
process,
you
know
those
conversations
will
continue
and
we'll
get
more
clarity
around
exactly.
What's
what
they're
wanting
us
to
do
and
how
we'd
go
about
doing
that
and
using
the
funding
to
do
it.
A
I
mean
that's
good
to
know
caroline
as
they've
all
said,
lee
should
be
involved
in
all
of
these
processes
as
many
as
we
can,
because
I
think
our
voice
is
a
useful
one
to
have
been
a
a
rough,
tough,
terrific
northern
city
with
many
admirable
qualities.
I
think
we
should
be
getting
involved
in
all
these
kind
of
consultations.
I've
got
casa,
anderson
next.
C
Just
a
couple
of
well
more
than
a
couple,
I
have
concerns
at
the
way
we
are
going
to
be
responding
to
the
nppf
changes.
C
I
personally
would
have
liked
to
have
seen
this
done
via
the
way
that
we've
done
it
in
the
past
on
development
plans.
By
having
a
workshop
to
look
at
in
detail
all
of
these
proposals,
I
noticed
that
there's
been
no
appending
of
the
actual
government
document
to
our
papers
today.
Nor
is
there
any
reference
at
the
back
of
the
papers.
C
We
are
not
where
you
would
normally
put
a
link
to
get
access
to
those
particular
things
where
it
says
at
the
bottom
background
papers
on
most
things:
it's
not
there
either,
so
we
can't
do
much
research.
I
personally
would
prefer
that
we
looked
at
our
workshop
to
look
at
our
methodology
because
there's
a
number
of
things,
climate
change
and
the
article
4
jump
to
mind
straight
away
when
I
think
we
need
a
detailed
debate
rather
than
having
it
today
when
we're
not
quite
sure
as
to
what's
happening
in
terms
of
the
design.
C
What
I'm
not
clear
about
is
what
unit
they're
talking
about
that's
been
done
at.
Is
it
city
level
only
is
it
a
hmca
level?
Is
it
community
committee
level?
C
Is
it
at
neighborhood
plan
group
area
having
different
ones,
so
you
could
end
up
with
you
know:
10
15,
20
30
different
design
codes,
all
maybe
with
a
central
theme
going
through
the
middle
of
it,
but
then
because
one
design
does
not
suit
another
part
of
the
city.
Anybody
who
sits
in
a
plans
panel
knows
that,
when
you're
trying
to
design
things
out,
there
are
certain
things
that
work
brilliantly
in
some
parts
of
the
city
but
for
many
reasons,
wouldn't
work
in
other
parts
of
the
city.
C
So
how
are
we
going
to
deal
with
the
breakdown
of
that
the
next
one
as
well,
in
terms
of
the
viability
a
lot
of
times
again
on
plans
panels,
we
get
the
developers
come
back
to
and
say
sorry,
it's
not
viable.
We
can't
do
it
to
your
specification.
We
can't
do
it
the
way
you
want
and
they
make
the
case
the
district
valuer
comes
along.
We
don't
always
at
plans
panel,
get
the
full
details
behind
it.
We
get
a
summary.
C
Usually
so
some
of
us
who
do
have
a
knowledge
of
finance
cannot
then
probe
more
fully
where
some
of
the
information
is
coming
from.
So
if
we
do
end
up
with
design
codes,
what's
the
chances
of
a
developer,
arguing
against
it
on
viability,
terms
and
the
final
thing
which
has
already
been
covered
in
terms
of
the
pilot
approach
that
it
would
all
depend
on
where
you
see
the
units
coming
from,
is
it
city
wide
or
is
it
some
other
broken
down
unit
for
there,
because
you
could
then
pilot
it
in?
A
I
Chair,
if
I,
if
I
could
just
just
just
come
in
on
that,
so
so
it's
in
the
march
for
this
one
and-
and
I
think
I
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
bit
of
context
really
to
this,
because
I
think
it's
important
that
panel
understand
what
this
this
consultation
represents.
Really,
because
it's
a
bit
of
a
hybrid
and
it's
also
without
being
it.
I
It
appears
quite
piecemeal
and-
and
if
I
would
say,
ad
hoc
and
and
the
reasons
for
that
are
that
it
purports
to
to
report
back
on
the
building
better
building
beautiful
commission
findings,
which
it
does
through
some
changes
to
the
mppf
and
with
the
model
code.
But
it
also
drifts
into
some
of
the
things
that
were
raised
within
the
planning
white
paper.
Now
we
don't
have
an
understanding
of
whether
what
it's
saying
is
it's
only
change
arising
from
the
white
paper
or
whether
there's
going
to
be
more
change
coming.
I
So
I
think
possibly
the
biggest
concern
that
we
could
express
on
this
is
that
it
does
appear
that
it
is
quite
ad
hoc.
So
what
we're
not
seeing
is
the
bigger
picture,
we're
not
seeing
what
the
government
thinks.
The
purpose
of
planning
should
be
post
its
extensive
planning,
white
paper
consultation.
I
What
we
are
seeing
is
a
focus
on
some
updates
as
a
result
of
building
better
building
beautiful,
along
with
some
article,
four
change,
etc,
so
that
that
does
put
us
in
a
bit
of
a.
We
are
a
bit
concerned
that
if
this
is
the
the
tenor
of
the
sort
of
response,
that's
gonna
come
out
with
quite
tight
time
frames.
I
I
This
is,
I
think,
as
as
as
para,
3.26
sets
out
that
after
dpp,
a
detailed
response
will
be
drafted,
which
it's
proposed
will
be
in
consultation
with
the
executive
member
before
going
to
mhclg,
so
certainly
taking
on
board
the
points
raised
by
panel
today.
But
I
just
wanted
to
to
make
that
that
point
and
and
finally
on
the
the
viability
point,
and
I
think,
coupled
with
the
sort
of
slight
frustration,
that
the
government
haven't
really
captured,
everything
that
that
they
should
have
from
the
white
paper.
I
This
certainly
does
more
to
promote
design
within
the
mppf,
but
we
still
have
to
balance
design
against
everything
else
that
the
mppf
is
seeking
to
provide.
It
certainly
doesn't
provide
elevate
it
above
the
status
at
which
it
was
held
previously,
and
members
will
recall
that,
and,
as
sarah
and
caroline
said,
we
have
quite
a
lot
of
design
guidance
within
the
city.
I
One
of
the
things
that
precluded
us
from
really
using
that
in
force
was
not
having
a
five-year
housing,
land
supply
and
seeing
some
of
those
policies
being
penalized-
and
I
think
councilor
anderson's
point
about
viability-
is
a
point
well
made,
because
what
the
mppf
doesn't
do
is
make
an
update
to
say
that
good
design
can
be
delivered
in
viable
means
and
should
be
insured
alongside
viability
considerations
so
that,
for
example,
good
design
is,
is
included
from
the
very
beginning
so
that
when
developers
purchase
the
land
they've
already
factored
in
excellent
design
and
beauty
in
into
those
just,
it
doesn't
say
that
what
what
well
what
we
have
is
we
have
this
retained
balance.
I
So
some
good
things
in
this
and
and
some
heartening
things
about
sustainable
development,
design,
etc,
but,
but
not
quite
within
what
what
we
expect
or
what.
What
the
the
future
planning
system
might
look
like,
which
which
is
still
to
come.
A
This
would
ultimately
really
rather
need
to
be
tied
up
in
the
new
town
and
country
planning
act
in
some
form
and
to
bring
it
all
together.
However,
I
don't
think
that's
on
the
cards
any
time
soon.
Okay,
so
thanks
so
counselor
richie
and
then
I
think
mr
feeny
wants
to
come
in,
but
I
want
to
let
a
few
other
elected
members
in
first
david,
so
we've
got
council
richie
and
then
council
mckenna.
H
A
H
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
want
to
concentrate
on
on
article
4
and
I'm
glad
to
see
that
there
are
concerns.
As
you
know,
I've
raised
the
fact
that
we
actually
need
to
review
article
4
and
strengthen
it
because
we're
behind
the
curve
as
the
market's
shifting
and
and
the
developers
many
are
from
london.
It
appears
and
moving
out
into
different
areas
such
as
bramley
and
I'm
sure
other
areas.
I
know
I'm
leaving
I've
had
a
few.
H
I
don't
know
the
extent
of
article
4
protection
in
harmony,
but
certainly
moving
it,
this
the
other
suburbs
out
from
the
traditional
areas.
So
we
need
to
strengthen
that,
and
I
know
it's
been
programmed
in
and
other
priorities
have
gotten
its
way,
but
the
question
I've
got
is:
if
this
came
in,
would
it
be
be
applied
going
forwards,
I.e
the
article
for
protection
that
we've
got
in
now
would
remain,
or
would
you
know,
be
all
torn
up
and
start
again?
H
Basically,
because
if
it's
the
latter
or
the
former,
which
I
forget,
which
way
I
put
them
in
actually
but
the
one
where
we
keep
what
we've
got.
That
tells
me
we
need
to
crack,
on
with
the
review
of
article
four
to
get
some
control
that
sarah
spoke
so
clearly
about
in
these
in
these
areas,
because
these
developers
have
no
consideration
whatsoever
about
the
impact
that
these
developments
have
on
our
often
narrow
streets
with
limited
parking
and
the
other
associated
behaviors.
H
A
You,
council
richie.
I
agree
with
all
of
that.
It's
yeah
it's
a
big
concern
in
my
patch
as
well.
Just
so,
if
you've
captured
those
comments
on
article
four,
I
think
that
just
sleep
out
is
they
want
to
confine
them
to
the
narrowest
possible
areas
and
that's
a
big
sort
of
huge
concern.
Isn't
it
I
mean
I
think,
using
if
you
like,
area-based
deterrent
area-based
policy
can
head
off
problems
before
they
become
really
significant
problems
head
them
off
at
the
past
to
use
a
crap
hacking
phrase.
A
You
know
what
I
mean
and
I
think
we've
seen
that
with
in
licensing
with
cumulative
impact
zones
which
restricts
licensing
from
premises
from
where
there
are
problems
being
shrunk
down
to
just
very
narrowly
defined
areas.
From
previously
we've
used
them
as
an
airy
deterrent
and
therefore
they
become
less
effective.
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
the
same
things
apply
to
article
4
directions
regards
to
the
spread
of
hmos
and
concentration
hmos.
A
F
Thank
you
chair.
A
lot
of
it's
been
covered,
but
I'm
particularly
concerned
blood
risk
management
starting
out
polygraph
311.
As
you
know,
we
live
pretty
near
to
the
quicksaw
valley
and
we've
seen
some
horrendous
flooding
in
that
you
know
around
my
area,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
I
understand
the
response
from
us
in
312.,
it
starts
off
well
enough,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
we
cover
the
issues
very
well,
I'm
not
suggesting
anything.
F
Well,
I'm
sorry
that
doesn't
that
doesn't
seem
that
doesn't
seem
realistic
to
me
when
we're
talking
about
what
a
resilient
material.
I'm
sure
I
know
sarah.
I
know
caroline
lovely
kids
by
the
way,
caroline
dope,
my
grandson
keeps
muscling
in
as
well.
We
all
understand
that
I'm
sure
we
can
do
much
much
better
than
that
and
I'll
leave
it
there.
F
I
am
reassured
with
what
martin
has
said:
that's
not
the
final
draft,
and
hopefully
when
this
is
the
final
draft
it'll
be
far
more
punchy
and
we'll
come
up
with
much
much
better
examples
than
water
resilient
paint.
I
don't
even
know
what
it
is.
Thank
you
chair.
B
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
want
to
say
how
supportive
I
am
of
all
the
strength
of
strengthening
that's
gone
on
around
design.
B
I'm
I'm
really
pleased
to
see
that
we
are
turning
our
attentions
to
this
area
and
I
agree
with
the
officers
views
about
the
use
of
the
word
beauty
and
beautiful.
I
quite
agree-
and
I
think
good
design
or
excellent
design
even
would
be,
is
a
much
more
objective
term
and
and
would
not
necessarily
lead
to
the
kind
of
discussions
that
we
sometimes
drift
into
in
plans
panels
which
become
a
sort
of
designed
by
committee,
because
people
are
thinking
about
perhaps
what
their
own
taste
is,
rather
than
what
the
nature
of
good
design
is.
B
So
I
absolutely
support
that
fully
listening
to
martin
and
putting
it
into
context.
I
I
What
it
doesn't
necessarily
do-
and
it
goes
to
councillor
anderson's
point
about
viability-
is
ensure
that
that
can
be
delivered
alongside
all
the
other
planning
requirements
that
we're
seeking
to
deliver
consistently
in
a
in
in
a
city
like
leeds,
and
if
I,
if
I
may
just
illustrate
that
quickly,
one
of
the
the
aspects
of
the
bid
to
clg
was
that
in
their
design
typologies,
they
were
looking
at
what
they
called
a
city
center
type
design
and
what
they
called
an
inner
suburb
design,
and
our
pitch
to
clg
was
well
that
inner
suburb
type
design
may
look
very
different,
depending
on
which
part
of
the
inner
suburbs
you're
in
in
a
large
northern
city
like
leeds.
I
If
you're
looking
at
the
sort
of
kirkstall
corridor,
so
so
there's
there's
more
to
be
done
councillor,
but
I
think
until
the
the
government
sort
of
finalize
what
the
purposes
of
planning
are
and
clarify
that,
which
is,
I
think
what
this
panel
suggested
before,
that
the
purpose
of
planning
is
to
deliver
sustainable
development
and
tackle
climate
change
and
deliver
good
design
for
health
and
wellbeing,
etc.
We
may
still
be
in
this
this
balancing
exercise
which
which
in
some
cases
may
see
design
pushed
down
by
other
considerations.
B
That
was
my
worst
fear
that
it
would
be
pulled
down
by
other
considerations,
because
I
I
the
I
have
always
found
since
I
became
involved
in
planning
this
issue
about
things
being
overall
policy
compliant
very,
very
difficult
to
to
understand
and
I'm
sure
councillor
campbell
will
agree
that
he's
often
of
the
view
that
it
should
be
entirely
policy
compliant
or
not
to
be
approved
and
design
has
constantly
been
the
poor,
the
poorest
neighbor
the
poorest
partner,
and
is
there
anything
that
we
can
do
in
our
deliberations?
A
I
think
that's
a
million
dollar
question.
Caroline.
Oh,
a
several
billion
dollar
question.
Actually
it's
probably
a
useful
point
to
bring
mr
feeny
in.
I
think
thank
you.
J
Thank
you
chair.
I
was
just
going
to
add
a
number
of
points
where
I
think
you
you've
picked
them
up
really
with
martin
as
well.
I
think
it's
a
fair
comment
about
the
balance
of
overall
considerations
and
where
does
design
sit
with
that,
and
I
think
the
key
issue
is:
it
doesn't
sit
in
isolation
from
all
of
these
other
policy
considerations
as
well.
J
So
you
know
we
do
need
to
understand
within
the
context
of
the
planning
white
paper,
what
status
design
is
going
to
have
and
how
does
that
sit
more
widely
with
place
making
and
the
climate
emergency
agenda
along
with
economic
recovery?
You
know
there
are
all
of
those
factors
that
need
to
be
brought
together
and
also
health
and
well-being
is
a
key
consideration.
So
I
think
what
we,
what
we
need
is
some
clarity
rather
than
ambiguity,
and
something
which
is
trying
to
amplify
the
importance
of
design
without
any
explanation
about
these
other
equally
important
policy
topics.
J
At
the
same
time,
I
think,
in
terms
of
what's
in
front
of
us
it
does
present
major
opportunities
for
for
leads.
I
mean
we
have
a
very
positive
track
record
in
terms
of
providing
and
preparing
design
guidance
over
many
years
on
many
different
topics
and
also
working
with
neighborhood
planning
groups
as
well
in
in
order
to
try
and
amplify
local
issues
in
relation
to
to
design.
J
Making.
Then
there's
an
inherent
tension,
isn't
there
between
these
different
pieces
of
work
and
and
the
objectives
that
they
have.
But
all
of
that
said,
I
think
it's
very
positive,
that
as
a
council,
we
are
putting
together
this
pilot
bid,
because
that
would
enable
us
to
sort
of
enter
the
phrase
so
to
speak
in
terms
of
trying
to
come
forward
with
a
working
practical
methodology
for
a
complex
urban
geography
and
settlement
pattern
of
the
place.
J
That
is
leads
and
hopefully
bring
some
insight
to
that,
because
I
think
we
need
to
try
and
draw
together
some
thinking
around
these
different
typologies
and
how
that
reads
to
the
different
character
areas
of
leads,
without
it
being
too
prescriptive
either,
because
the
document
would
need
to
deal
with
unforeseen
issues
as
well
as
allowing
a
degree
of
latitude
in
terms
of
embracing
what
what
the
future
might
look
like,
and
I'm
pleased
that,
therefore,
that
we
we've
been
able
to
throw
our
hat
into
the
ring
and-
and
we
can
update
members
on
that
and
and
the
process
to
help
shape
what
that
methodology
might
be.
J
So
there
is
some
follow-up
planned
on
that
subject
to
what
the
government
say
about
our
bid
and
then
just
finally,
in
response
to
council
anderson's
comments
about
the
documentation.
We
did
actually
put
a
link.
I
think
in
para,
one
of
the
report
to
the
main
documentation
which
would
enable
members
to
to
click
onto
the
guidance
we
didn't
want
to
overwhelm
the
papers
by
adding
the
full
document
to
it.
But
it
is,
it
is
there
in
the
bundle,
through
a
through
a
link,
if
that's
helpful
chair.
Thank
you.
A
A
C
New
one
mind
is
a
new
one:
okay,
far
away
well,
what
was
it
was.
I'm
still
waiting
on
answers
to
some
of
the
questions
I
raised.
Youth
chair
asked
the
question
about
the
deadline
I
in
to
I
the
way
I
interpreted
your
question
was:
is
it
feasible
to
have
a
workshop
before
the
deadline
date?
C
Yes
or
no,
and
even
if,
if
the
answer
is
no,
then
fine,
I
I
don't
think
you
got
an
answer,
but
you
didn't
get
the
full
answer
and
it
didn't
help
me
and
also
my
other
question
about
how
small
have
these
design
code
units
to
be
whatever?
Are
we
going
to
take
it
down
to
it?
C
If
it's
city-wide,
fine,
that's
what
we've
got
to
work
within,
but
if
we're
allowed
to
take
it
down
and
devolving
it
down
to
a
smaller
economic
unit,
and
I
think
we
should
go
for
that
level
of
down,
because
we've
got
some
very
good
neighborhood
plans
that
sit
close
together
in
terms
of
the
geography
of
them
there's
a
number
of
them
coming
together.
So
we
could
pilot
that
out.
I'd
give
you
an
example
of
the
outer
northeast.
C
Where
there's
a
number
of
villages
have
got
neighborhood
plans
and
it
would
might
be
worthwhile
having
a
design
code
for
that
particular
area.
I'm
just
looking
for
guidance.
I
didn't
get
an
answer
to
the
workshop
point
or
on
what
size
of
units
we're
talking
about.
A
Okay:
let's
go
back
to
front
what
about
the
officers?
What
about
the
size
of
unit?
What
are
they
talking
about?
The
government's
talking
about.
N
N
So
they
sort
of
talk
about
master
plans
being
most
suited
to
the
sort
of
site
scale,
but
then
you
would
have
you
could
have
area
based
guidance
or
sort
of
wider
areas,
so
it
is
really
left
to
to
local
discretion
about,
what's
most
appropriate
for
your
areas,
which
I
think
is
is
a
positive
because,
that's
you
know,
I
think,
as
a
city
we'd
like
to
make
that
decision
about
where
it
is
most
valuable
for
us
to
have
guidance
in
place,
and
I
certainly
agree
that
you
know
neighborhood
plan
level,
there's
a
potentially
a
role
for
that,
as
well
as
looking
at
sites
and
more
more
overarching
guidance
as
well.
N
A
It's
gonna
be
an
interesting
challenge
for
us
to
get
to
the
right
areas.
The
right
levels
in
the
right
areas
in
leads.
That's
interesting.
Okay,
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
a
workshop
yeah
I
mean
we
have
used
those
in
the
past.
Haven't
we,
I
think,
thinking
about
time
scales
and
the
fact
that
we're
moving
into
election
season.
I
think
that
might
be
tricky.
I
don't
know
what
other
members
think
and
there's
quite
a
lot
of
work.
A
We
need
officers
need
to
do
in
order
to
respond
to
that,
to
them
to
mclug's
timescales,
obviously
we're
feeding
into
that
we're
going
to
get
another
chance
to
feed
into
some
more
of
that
sure.
But
I'm
just
putting
out
to
the
floor
then
into
wanting
to
be
helpful
and
put
out
to
the
floor.
I'm
not
sure
a
workshop
is
is
viable,
given
we've
got
for
for
members,
especially
but
for
officers
perspective
I'll,
be
keen
to
hear
as
well.
I
J
Sorry
sorry,
chair
yeah,
I
mean
just
on
on
the
workshop
marty-
might
have
a
comment
comment
as
well.
I
mean
I'm
just
thinking
about
the
logistics
of
setting
something
up
before
the
deadline.
I
think
what
might
make
sense
would
be
if
we
are
successful
with
the
pilot
bid.
There
may
be
some
potential
at
that
point
to
have
a
workshop
session
to
help
frame
what
our
design
code
might
look
like
and
if
we
are
engaging
with
clg.
J
If
we
are
successful
with
our
bid.
Some
of
the
wider
comments
that
members
have
made
and
the
points
raised
by
council
anderson's
as
well
about
the
specificity
of
design
code
areas.
If
I
could,
if
I
could
call
it
that
we
could
try
and
flush
some
of
that
out
with
clg.
J
If
we've
got
a
seat
at
the
table
with
our
with
our
bid
in
place
and
then
using
that
interaction
with
clg
so
to
speak,
we
could
feed
that
into
developing
our
own
local
methodology,
which
is
enabling
us
to
develop
something
which
is
fit
for
purpose
for
leads
and
the
the
variety
of
characters
that
we
have.
So
that
might
be
a
more
productive
way
of
addressing
it.
I
don't
know
if
marty
wanted
to
add
to
that,
but
it's
just
some
initial
thoughts.
J,
if
that's
helpful,.
I
Yeah
yeah,
thank
you
chair,
I'm
I'm.
I
was
going
to
say
just
so
that
members
are
comforted
by
this
there's.
Clearly
a
shift
in
the
approach
to
to
taking
account
of
design
for
which
members
will
need.
Certainly
members
of
development
plan
panels
will
need
significant
training
in
so
we're
definitely
conscious
that
we
need
to
follow
this
up,
but
but
but
at
the
moment
there
are
the
changes
to
the
mppf
itself,
which
are
kind
of
outlined
initially
within
the
report,
and
I
think
officers
have
captured
members
responses
to
those.
I
A
Okay,
I
mean,
to
all
intents
and
purposes,
this
is
the
workshop
given
given
the
time
scales
on
things
in
large
part,
okay,
council
richie.
H
Thank
you.
I've
got
to
be
careful
not
to
move
back
here.
The
dog's
just
settled
in
behind
my
journey
a
little
bit
of
dog's
tail,
so
try
and
keep
steady
yeah
just
on
I'm.
This
is
meant
to
be
helpful.
I
hope
this
isn't
I'm
not
speaking
out
return
here,
3.26
detailed
response.
In
conjunction
with
the
exec
member,
I
dread
to
think
councillor.
Hayden's
got
a
hell
of
a
job
taking
on
an
exit
role.
I
I
don't
know
where
to
start,
and
she
has
my
sympathies
and
best
wishes.
H
I'm
sure
you'll
make
a
great
fist
of
it,
but
I
don't
know
how
you
feel
about
having
you
know.
You've
had
one
meeting
you've
listened
to
comments,
but
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
experience
around
this
table,
whether
you
feel
it
would
be
helpful
if
that
report
kind
of
got
circulated
to
the
members
of
the
panel
and
maybe
additional
comments
before
you
signed
it
off.
As
I
say,
I
hope
that's
not
meant
to
be
patronizing
or
it's
meant
to
be
helpful,
because
I
realize
you'll
have
a
hell
of
a
lot
on
you.
H
D
Can
I
can
I
come
come
in
chair?
Thank
you
thank
you
and
I
hope
I'm
not
lagging
behind
my
no
that's
really
useful
council
richie.
Thank
you
kevin.
It
is
a
big
portfolio
and
I
am
learning
hey.
I
had
a
call
in
yesterday,
so
I'm
for
five,
but
nearly
six
years
on
scrutiny.
I've
never
done
a
calling.
D
So
yes,
so
it
is
a
huge
learning
curve
and
I
would
be
incredibly
grateful
because
there
is
enough
just
listening
to
this
meeting
today,
just
how
many
the
experience
and
knowledge
around
this
virtual
table
is
is
extraordinary.
So
I
would
really
appreciate
that.
Thank
you.
A
C
One
of
the
concerns
that
I've
been
talking
to
mark
nelly
about
is
the
city
center
and
the
impact
of
government
policy
on
what
may
or
may
not
be
happening
in
our
city
centres
in
terms
of
permitted
development.
So
in
paragraph
314
in
terms
of
the
second
sentence
it
does
highlight
it
brings
to
the
surface
now
I've
got
my
personal
views.
C
Martin
heard
some
of
my
views
yesterday
about
that,
but
I
don't
think
we've
discussed
that
fully
today
to
give
any
feedback
to
officers
or
to
have
the
debate
within
us
as
a
plans
panel
on
what
our
views
are
on
the
government
strategy,
good
or
bad.
But
you
know
we've
got
to
have
a
view.
I
think.
A
So
is
my
phone
going
well,
barry
now's
your
time.
So
could
you
just
what
was
that
paragraph
reference
again?
Apologies.
C
Three
fourteen
three
fourteen
second
sentence:
three
fourteen
seconds
I
mean
because
the
government
appear
to
be
going
down
the
line
of
allowing
more
and
more
permitted
development
yeah.
Now
there
will
be
some
parts
of
the
city
that
will
fit
smoothly
in
with
there'll
be
other
parts
of
the
city
that
will
not
sit
in
with
now,
I'm
not
going
to
name
any
particular
site
for
fear
of
any
frighteners
up.
C
There
are
one
or
two
city
center
sites
that
if
they
were
to
be
coming
forward,
you
know
how
are
we
going
to
be
protecting,
say
the
retail
element
and
also
to
now
allow
housing
on
the
top
and
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
about
green
infrastructure
associated
with
it?
I
think
all
of
this
is
and
is
when
we
talk
about
town
centres,
I'm
not
just
necessarily
talking
about
leeds
city
center.
I'm
talking
about
some
of
the
other
centers
that
we've
got
around
the
city
as
well,
what
impact
it
would
have
now.
C
I
know
that
there
is
a
debate
going
on
that.
So
far,
a
lot
of
developers
haven't
yet
come
forward
with
many
schemes.
So
there
is
that
at
the
moment,
yeah
there
is
no
doubt
that
the
government
thrust
is
to
start
getting
that
looked
at
more
and
more,
and
so
what
are
we
getting
on
the
stocks?
What
comments
are
we
feeding
back
to
government
about
the
potential
impact
of
it,
and
let's
have
a
debate
on
that
subject?
To
be
quite
frank,.
A
I
Yep
thanks
chair,
so
I
I
think
what
what
I
I
could
suggest
is
that
we
come
back
in
maybe
july,
with
a
paper
that
maybe
pulls
a
few
things
together
from
a
city
center
town
center,
local
center
perspective,
because
this
panel's
had
updates
on
the
class
e
proposals
of
government
and
on
permitted
development,
but-
and
I
suppose,
within
those
papers.
I
It's
been
noted
the
implications
on
town
and
local
centers.
But
what
you
haven't
had
is
something
that
maybe
brings
that
around
a
narrative
that
you
could
discuss
what
other
parts
of
the
council,
for
example,
through
management
initiatives
are
doing
in
town
and
local
centers,
certainly
post
covid,
which
is
very
important
and
the
role
of
planning
in
that,
and
I
think,
bringing
this
panel
back
up
to
date
with
what
the
current
policies
say
about
town
and
local
centers
and
actually
what
the
role
of
planning
may
be.
I
So
I'm
perfectly
happy
if
that
helps
councillor
anderson
to
to
come
back
to
this
panel,
drawing
a
few
of
those
threads
together.
A
I
mean
you
think
it
does
from
my
part.
I
don't
watch
about
council
anderson
but
barry
if
you
want
to
come
back
on
that.
C
I
mean,
if
that's
what
the
majority
of
people
on
the
panel
I'm
happy
to
go
along
with
it,
I'm
just
conscious
that
the
government
are
pushing
this
agenda
further
and
further
up
and
by
november
by
july,
we
might
find
that
circumstances
have
got
out
of
control
through
no
fault
of
anybody
on
league
city
council.
No,
no!
C
How
are
we
feeding
back
to
government
because
the
officer
obviously
felt
serious
enough
to
put
you
actually
in
their
report,
which
yeah,
I
think,
so
what
I'm
wanting
to
do
is
to
give
the
officer
some
further
comments
so
that
they
can
beef
up
whatever
the
officer
was
planning
to
put
in
anyway
and
give
the
officer
some
guidance,
I'm
actually
believe
it
or
not,
trying
to
be
helpful
to
help
the
officer
put
more
meat
on
the
sentence
that
they
put
in.
That
was
where
I
was
coming
from.
A
No,
that
that's
helpful,
casper
anderson,
david
you've
put
your
hand
up.
J
It
was
just
to
to
add
chair,
I
mean
you
know,
I
fully
understand
and
support
counsel
anderson's
concerns
about
increasing
pd.
I
I
think
we
have
reflected
that
in
previous
consultation
documents
that
we've
been
able
to
respond
to
when,
when
we've
been
able
to
do
that.
I
think
part
of
the
challenge
here
is
that
some
of
those
pd
relaxations
have
been
introduced
without
any
consultation
and
they're
already
in
place.
I
mean
the
point:
is
here
we're
trying
to
influence
what's
going
to
happen
next,
so
I
think,
if
count
anderson
has
some
helpful
comments.
J
As
part
of
the
paper
that's
been
submitted
today
chair,
we
can
incorporate
those
as
part
of
the
response
for
the
27th
and
then,
as
martin
says,
we
could
bring
together
a
wider
piece
which
is
trying
to
draw
some
of
these
strands
together
in
terms
of
the
various
other
council
initiatives
which
are
seeking
to
bring
vitality
and
viability
to
city
center
locations.
Notwithstanding
the
challenges
we
have
around
pd.
A
No
thanks,
that's
sensible,
and
if
and
also
for
barry,
if
it
it
acquires
a
head
of
steam
that
we
need
to
get
together,
especially
for
it,
then
we
can
convene
that's
not
a
problem
at
all.
One
of
the
many
miracles
of
zoom
is
that
this
is
a
lot
easier
to
do
than
all
all
having
to
go
to
six
and
seven
and
books
based
there
as
it
were
so
yeah.
We
can
certainly
certainly
convene
for
that
as
a
with
a
city
center
focus.
I
have
no
problem
with
that.
A
I
don't
think
any
other
members
would
right
on
that.
I
think
we
can
draw
the
item
to
a
close.
Looking
at
an
array
of
faces
all
seem
to
be
in
agreement.
That's
excellent!
I
think,
unless
I'm
mistaken,
that's
our
last
substantive
item
for
the
day,
so
I
think
I
can
draw
the
meeting
to
a
close,
excellent.
Well,
listen!
Thank
you
all
very
much
for
your
attendance.