►
From YouTube: Adur Planning Committee - 3 October 2022
Description
For more information, please visit:
Facebook: http://fb.me/AdurandWorthingCouncils
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/adurandworthing
Website: https://www.adur-worthing.gov.uk
A
A
The
recording
of
this
meeting
will
be
available
to
view
for
one
year
and
will
be
deleted
after
that
period.
The
council
has
advertised
all
the
planning
applications
to
be
considered
this
evening.
Some
people
have
applied
to
the
council
to
speak
either
in
support
or
to
object
to
a
planning
application.
A
A
B
Evening,
please
familiarize
yourself
with
the
fire
exits
from
this
room.
There
are
marked
Refuge
points
at
the
top
of
all
the
staircases
for
Mobility
vehicle
users.
There
is
no
fire
alarm
plan
during
this
meeting.
Therefore,
if
the
fire
alarm
sounds,
please
leave
via
the
fire
exits
to
the
assembly
point,
which
is
the
far
side
of
the
car
park
by
the
Flint
wall.
B
B
A
C
I'm
councilor
v
Barton,
the
application
for
the
Old
Town
Hall
in
Shoreham,
is
has
been
made
by
my
neighbor.
Now
my
neighbor
operates
a
Roofing
and
Scaffolding
business
near
me.
I
knew
that
he'd
bought
this
purchase
this
building
way
before
the
pandemic
started,
but
I
have
never
spoken
to
him
about
it.
He
spoke
to
my
husband
about
it
just
after
he
bought
it,
and
that
was
as
I
say
some
years
ago.
So
I
have
never
discussed
it
with
him.
In
fact,
I
haven't
seen
him
for
some
months.
A
No,
that's
fine.
We
will
now
go
to
public
Question.
Time
item
number
three
on
the
agenda
and
we
have
two
questions
this
evening.
The
first
one
is
James
breckel,
who
I
believe
is
not
here
yet
so
of
which
case
Gary.
Are
you
happy
to
read
that
question
out?
Thank
you
very
much.
So
this
will
be
read
out
by
Gary
pick.
Thank
you.
D
Yes,
thank
you
chairs.
The
public
question
we
have
received
from
Mr
breckel
States
I
would
like
to
address
the
planning
committee
with
regard
to
the
unreasonable
application
of
planning
conditions
in
regard
to
rainwater
design.
The
chairman
usually
asks
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting.
If
there
are
questions
for
the
committee,
the
council's
engineers
often
use
holding
objections
and
ask
applicants
to
consider
rainwater
drainage
as
part
of
the
pan
application
process.
D
This
is
unreasonable
and
has
the
effect
of
stifling
the
supply
of
housing.
I
will
elaborate
on
this
at
the
meeting.
James
breckel
is
an
architect
who
submits
planning
applications.
So
that's
the
question
clearly
he's
not
here
to
elaborate
on
that,
but
I
can
give
a
a
brief
answer.
As
committee
know,
drainage
is
an
issue
for
a
number
of
the
planning
applications
that
come
before
members,
the
ones
that
reach
you
are
often
the
ones
where
drainage
conditions
are
attached.
D
There
are
a
number
of
applications
that
haven't
got
to
this
committee,
yet
because
there
are
objections
on
drainage
grounds.
That
is
only
correct
that
we
look
at
these
very
carefully.
There
is
a
drainage
issue
across
the
district.
That's
an
unargable
fact,
particularly
in
certain
areas
and
therefore,
if
we
don't
have
sufficient
information
with
an
application
at
the
outset,
it
is
quite
usual
for
our
Technical
Services
section
to
raise
a
holding
objection
to
those
applications.
If
they
do,
we
try
and
see,
if
there's
a
resolution
to
that.
D
But
generally
they
don't
come
before
you
at
the
committee.
Clearly
the
ones
that
do
come
before
the
committee
are
ones
where
often
such
information
has
been
provided
and
potentially
negotiated
with
applicants,
but
I
think
what
members
have
said
before,
if
I've,
if
I've
heard
correctly,
is
even
then
that
sometimes
members
don't
feel
there's
enough
drainage
information
in
those
reports,
so
I
think
really.
D
The
conclusion
I
would
draw
from
that
is
is
an
important
issue,
obviously
for
applicants,
but
also
for
members
and
officers,
and
indeed
residents
alike
and
I-
think
that
at
this
stage
we
can
only
seek
as
much
information
as
we
can
get
for
the
committee
to
make
their
decisions
and
therefore,
while
I
appreciate
that
we
should
never
stop
rifle
supply
of
housing.
It
only
demonstrates
that
the
council
does
look
at
these
matters
of
drain
use
as
carefully
as
we
can,
and
only
when
we've
got
to
a
point
where
we
can
feel
confident.
There'll
be
no
issues.
A
E
E
I
believe
that
the
council
has
consulted
the
coastal
West
Sussex
design
review
panel
for
past
developments,
and
this
appears
to
be
resulted
in
uniformly
ugly
Brown
buildings.
Will
there
will
therefore
be
more
imagination
in
the
future?
Does
the
council
look
at
other
attractive
Coastal
developments
and
how
will
local
residents
be
involved
in
early
decision
making.
F
You're
going
to
reply
if
I
respond
to
the
first
part
of
the
question,
perhaps
that's
hi,
my
name
is
Moira
Hayes
I'm,
the
aid
of
planning
policy
manager.
F
Yes,
the
the
the
paper
you're,
referring
to
yes,
he's
talking
about
the
the
national
design
code
and
that's
a
a
process
for
for
assessing
districts
or
areas
or
sites,
and
providing
looking
at
the
details
and
sort
of
providing
a
vision
and
guidelines
as
to
how
development
might
come
forward
in
that
in
those
particular
areas
and
and
what
the
that
design
code
is,
it
does
and
requires,
as
part
of
the
process
is,
it
does
involve
public
participation.
F
D
Yes,
so
when
we
have
a
major
application,
that's
in
the
submitters
of
planning
application
as
part
of
the
determination
of
the
application
before
it
comes
to
committee.
The
design
review
panel
may
be
consulted
as
part
of
that.
So
in
effect,
it's
a
Consulting
another
pair
of
eyes
to
for
them
to
look
at
it
independently
to
assess
a
planning
application.
They
provide
comments
and
sometimes
guidance
to
an
applicant
who
may
or
may
not
wish
to
take
in
into
account
what
they've
said
they
don't
actually
design
anything
themselves.
D
So,
therefore,
obviously
residence
members
may
have
a
view
as
to
what
they
have
said
about
a
particular
application
as
to
whether
they've
been
too
critical,
not
critical
enough
or
could
have
suggested
various
improvements
or
not,
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
up
to
the
applicant
as
to
whether
they
wish
to
take
any
of
those
comments
on
board.
So
in
effect,
it's
just
part
of
the
consideration
procedure
when
it
gets
to
a
planning
application.
D
Of
course,
a
major
application
has
to
come
to
the
planning
committee
and
ultimately,
the
pharmacist
is
made
by
the
planning
committee
and,
of
course,
they're
perfectly
entitled
to
take
into
account
design,
as
well
as
many
other
factors
in
terms
of
residence
at
the
plan
application
stage.
Of
course,
they
are
consulted
at
the
same
time
as
the
design
review
panel
and
any
comments
received
are
fully
Incorporated
and
report
again
for
members
to
consider.
So
it's
really
the
case
with
the
design
you
view
a
plan.
D
Application
stage
is
another
pair
of
eyes,
an
independent
assessment,
if
you
like
from
qualified
Architects,
normally
and
designers,
and
to
look
at
that,
perhaps
there
might
be
a
perception
that
means
that
a
lot
of
plan
applications
change
dramatically
because
of
the
power's
involvement.
In
my
experience
they
don't
tend
to,
and
it
has
to
be
said,
of
course,
that
the
panel
will
be
mindful
of
government
guidance
about
the
principle
of
allowing
new
housing
and
so
on
whether
it
makes
sufficient
changes
for
residents
or
indeed,
the
committee
is
an
arguable
point.
I
won't
comment
on
that.
D
It
is
part
of
the
process
to
to
have
another
pair
of
eyes
and
consideration
on
it,
but
that's
really
just
again
another
Cog
in
the
process
of
many
consultations
where
we
have
individual
residents
up
to
I,
mean
societies
and
so
on.
E
So
could
I
just
ask
them?
How
will
res
Cape,
because
I
know
from
being
involved
with
area
that
most
residents,
we
have
anything
to
do
with
really
dislike
the
design
of
most
of
the
things
that
have
been
approved,
like
Kingston,
Wharf,
great,
big,
horrible,
Brown,
gulags
and
obviously
a
free
wolf
again,
and
people
are
complaining
about
what
that
looks.
Like
so
I
mean
there
are.
There?
Are
coastal
towns
littlehampton,
for
instance,
have
got
quite
nice
developments
which
reflect
the
area
more
and
I'm,
just
wondering
whether
we
I
mean
I.
E
Don't
want
you
to
think
that
we're
completely
against
development,
we're
not
we're.
What
we're
against
is
really
ugly
development
towering
blocks
and
things
you
could
make
it
the
design
much
more
attractive.
So
I'm
just
wondering
how
much
the
public
could
be
involved
with
that
or
whether
it
will
just
be
tokenistic.
D
Okay,
how
do
you
speak
from
the
plan?
Application
side
is
that
anyone
can
comment
on
a
on
a
planning
application.
All
those
comments
are
reported.
I
think
that
in
some
ways
we're
moving
towards
a
time
now
in
the
town,
where
perhaps
examples
of
other
developments
can
be
used
in
Residence
comments.
D
You
know,
perhaps
that
wasn't
the
case,
maybe
five
or
ten
years
ago
where,
but
if
it
ever
isn't
wanted
to
object,
for
example
and
say
well,
I
I
think
that
this
development
is
very
like
another
development
and
that's
the
reason
for
my
objection
because
of
of
color
and
design
and
so
on,
and
why
isn't
that
used?
You
know
it's
a
perfectly
valid
comment
in
the
planning
application,
certainly
and
I-
think
that
you
know
in
some
ways
a
more
sort
of
nuanced
comment
by
Resident
is
sometimes
much
better
than
just
saying.
D
I
object
full
stop,
because
that
doesn't
give
a
reason
where
supportive
residents
come
in
and
say
well,
look
actually
I'm
concerned,
because
this
res
this
development
resembles
that
one
and
we
don't
think
those
materials
or
that
scale
has
worked.
That's
a
comment:
that's
perfectly
legitimate
for
a
planning
application
for
any
plan
application.
It
will
be
reported
and
it
will
become
before
members
to
to
consider.
So
you
know
I'm
talking
about
active
party
once
a
plan
applications
come
in,
but
I
I
would
certainly
encourage
any
Resident
if
they
had.
D
E
F
F
So
the
design
code
process
as
I
say
it,
went
they're
very
new.
To
be
perfectly
honest,
they
only
came
out.
It's
only
something
the
government
published
I'm
just
trying
to
get
the
date
up.
It
was
in
the
last
yeah
October,
2021
I
believe
the
camera.
So
it's
it's
relatively
new.
The
government
are
running
some
pilot
schemes.
We're
not
part
of
that
to
be
honest,
but
there
are
authorities
involved
with
their
communities
that
working
at
different
levels,
some
are
looking
at
their
whole
District.
F
Some
are
looking
at
small
sites,
some
are
looking
at
areas
and
it's
about
getting
people
involved
in
in
setting
out
broad
principles
and
looking
at
things,
as
you
said,
like
like
materials
Etc
now,
unfortunately,
because
we're
at
an
early
stage,
I
can't
tell
you
when
that
design
process
is
going
to
kick
off
and
I.
Can't
I
can't
tell
you
exactly
how
it's
going
to
operate,
because
I
have
to
confess
I,
don't
know
the
details
yet
and
we're
not
at
that
stage.
F
But
what
we
will
do
is
keep
you
involved
or
keep
people
informed
as
to
as
to
to
how
the
the
where
we
think
that
these
these
things
will
will
kick
off
and
how
how
it's
actually
going
to
work.
It's
quite
a
detailed
methodology,
the
government
designed
code
and
we
we
probably
need
to
work
with
a
consultant
who
is
used
to
both
planning
process
and
and
the
planning
design
process
and
also
used
to
engaging
with
the
communities
on
this.
So
it's
quite
a
specialist
thing
and
we
want
to
make
sure
it's
right.
F
A
A
Yes,
all
in
agreement
agreed.
Thank
you
and
item
five
item
raised
under
urgency.
Provisions
there
are
none,
so
we're
going
to
have
a
slight
change
tonight
on
the
agenda.
We're
going
to
go
straight
first
of
all
to
item
number
seven,
which
is
the
brief
for
review
of
Western
Harbor
arm
Shoreham
Harbor,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
Steve
Nicholas
the
executive
member
to
come
forward
and
Maura
and
they're
going
to
talk
us
through
this.
Thank
you.
F
Lovely
thank
you.
If
I,
if
I,
if
I
sort
of
commence
and
just
explain
the
the
briefness
purpose,
is
that
we
know
the
the
allocation
of
the
western
Harbor
arm
was
was
set
out
for
Shoreham
Harbor,
a
generation
project
set
out
initially
in
the
Ada
local
plan
back
in
2017,
and
the
idea
is
about
working
with
our
colleagues
at
Brighton,
Hove
city
council
and
West
West
Sussex,
County
Council,
as
well
as
the
port
to
look
at
the
Regeneration
of
the
The
Wider
wider
Brownfield
area.
F
The
Western
Harbor
arm
itself
formed
a
key
part
of
the
housing
delivery
strategy
for
the
the
local
plan,
and
the
plan
was
accompanied
by
an
infrastructure
delivery
plan
which
set
out
the
infrastructure
requirements
envisaged
at
that
time.
For
the
development.
F
As
we
know
where,
where
we
are
today,
is
that
we're
very
conscious
that
developments
are
coming
forward
at
higher
densities
than
perhaps
originally
anticipated,
partly
due
to
the
fact
that
viability
has
has
changed
since
we
we
developed
the
plan
and,
of
course
that's
given
us
a
greater
number
of
dwellings,
we
had
a
a
figure
in
the
in
the
the
local
plan
in
set
out,
as
you
probably
wear,
a
minimum
of
1100
dwellings,
and
that
minimum
word
is
is
quite
important.
F
As
is
probably
aware,
the
inspector
at
the
local
plan
was
Keen
to
ensure
that
that
made
clear
that
we
could
go
above
that
figure
and
indeed
the
whole
local
plan.
Target
is
a
minimum
Target.
That's
because
he
was
very
conscious
that
we
had
a
shortfall
and
that's
one
of
the
mechanisms
to
help
us
get
a
sound
plan
despite
having
a
shortfall.
F
So,
as
we
know
now
we're
in
a
situation
we're
we're
very
aware.
There
are
concerns
that,
due
to
this
greater
number
of
dwellings
coming
forward,
there's
a
question
as
to
whether
the
infrastructure
and
the
level
and
type
of
infrastructure
we
we
identified
then
is
actually
appropriate
to
mitigate
the
impact
of
the
the
levels
of
development
they're
coming
through
now.
F
We're
aware
that
there
are
concerns
about
the
densities
of
some
schemes
coming
forward
and
whether
they
fit
appropriately
with
the
The
Joint
air
action
plan
in
terms
of
layout
and
place
making,
for
example,
and
the
national
pictures
changed.
We've
got
changes
in
in
National
policy
since
the
the
adoption
of
those
documents
and,
of
course
we
are
commencing
the
update
of
the
Ada
local
plan.
F
So
again,
it's
it's
a
good
opportunity
to
take
a
sense
check
of
where
we
are
now
so
and,
of
course,
this
this
review,
that's
that's
proposed
is-
is
giving
us
an
opportunity
to
to
perhaps
look
more
strategically
at
the
site
again
and
look
at
the
place
making
elements.
As
I
said,
the
jab
was
aspiring
to
a
high
quality
exempt
Player
Development,
you
know
high
quality
design
and
there
are
concerns.
F
We
are
aware
about
townscape
and
public
realm
issues
and
the
impact
of
those
High
higher
dwelling
numbers
and
what
the
implications
might
be
on
visual
impact
open
space
play
shaping
Etc.
So
this
is
an
opportunity
to
kind
of
have
a
look
and
perhaps
refresh
any
particular
elements.
So
you'll
probably
have
noted
the
brief
takes
two
two
sort
of
Key
Parts
first
part
is
sort
of
an
internal
analysis
and
review
looking
really
at
clarifying.
F
What's
actually
come
forward,
what's
been
granted
consent,
what
we
are
have
secured
on
our
collecting
in
terms
of
section
106s
and
whether
there
have
been
any
differences
from
the
adoptive
policy
requirements
and
if
so,
what
they
are
just
to
highlight
them
because
I
know
I'm,
aware
section.
106
documents
are
really
lengthy,
they're
not
easy
to
read.
F
Does
the
level
of
Development
coming
forward
need
a
different
kind
of
infrastructure?
Is
there
a
policy
change
which
may
mean
something
different
might
happen,
and
if
so,
what?
What
are
the
implications?
We
will
look
at
viability.
Of
course,
as
I
mentioned
already,
there
are
changes
and-
and
there
are
higher
costs,
as
we
know
involved
in
delivering
developments
at
the
moment,
and
we
need
to
assess
what
the
the
implications
might
be
and
the
impact
on
other
elements,
such
as
affordable
housing,
delivery
and
another
element
we'd
like
to
carry
out
in
this.
F
This
first
part
is
to
do
some
scenario
modeling
of
those
sites
which
haven't
been
perhaps
actively
promoted
yet
looking
at
what
theoretically
could
come
forward
on
those
type
on
those
sites
in
terms
of
numbers
and
the
idea
is
to
model
different
levels
of
density,
so
different,
different
scales
on
those
particular
sites.
So
when
we're
having
those
conversations
with
the
infrastructure
providers,
we
can
give
different
scenarios
to
say
what
happened
at
this
level
of
development
or
at
this
level.
So
we
can
get
a
broader
picture
as
I
say.
F
That's
the
the
the
first
first
sort
of
strand
of
the
work,
and
obviously
we
are
we've
started
to
talk
into
stakeholders
and
we
will
also
be
talking
to
and
working
with,
the
landowners
of
of
the
sites,
particularly
those
where
there
hasn't
been
much
active
promotion
recently.
F
So
we
can
get
an
idea,
an
understanding
of
their
intentions,
so
the
the
outcomes
and
that
work
May
would
be
looking
at
infrastructure,
mitigations,
any
particular
changes
and
they
can
be
encapsulated
within
an
updated
infrastructure
plan
and
or
within
the
the
emerging
local
Planet
as
it
comes
out.
The
the
topic
here
is
we
suggest
focusing
on
are
waste
water
distribution,
health,
education,
open
space,
transport,
parking
and
air
quality,
because
we
we
understand
that
those
are
the
areas
giving
giving
the
community
the
the
greatest
concern.
F
So
we
suggest
focusing
our
attentions
on
those.
The
second
strand
of
the
review
is
the
more
place
making
and
design
kind
of
approach,
trying
to
look
strategically
at
the
area.
The
the
visual
implications
of
these
high
levels,
development
and
again
how
they
relate
to
the
aspirations
set
out
in
the
gym,
and
this
is
where,
as
we
were
talking
earlier,
the
design
code
approach
could
be
be
really
useful
and,
as
I
said
before,
public
participation
would
be
integral
element
of
that.
F
Now
again,
that
work
could
could
give
rise
to
additional
planning
guidance
to
show
it
ensure
that
when
these
individual
developments
come
forward,
they
are
contributing
to
the
to
that
vision
for
this
sort
of
high
quality
Waterside
destination.
So
again,
in
that
work,
we
can
include
various
options
and
recommendations.
F
We
can
test
scenarios
and
development,
as
I
mentioned
before
and
test,
perhaps
other
other
approaches,
perhaps
looking
at
open
space
on
site
and
what
that
might
look,
how
that
might
help
in
terms
of
place
making
and
what
that
might
mean
in
terms
of
implications,
for
example,
housing
numbers
or
how
we
might
deliver
a
flood
defense
in
an
area
where
there's
open
space.
F
So,
looking
at
the
knock-on
effects
of
any
any
changes
we
might
might
make
so
geographically
and
there's
a
map
which,
hopefully
members
have
a
front
and
lymph
node,
is
on
the
the
screen
behind
us.
Geographically,
the
scope
of
the
brief
we
suggest
is
the
Western
Harbor
arm,
which
is
the
black
dotted
line.
I
hope
you
can
can
see
the
idiot
in
front
of
you
or
on
the
wall.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Pete
now,
as
I
say,
the
brief
we'll
be
looking
and
reviewing
those
that
particular
area.
F
But
when
we
have
the
conversations
with
the
infrastructure
providers,
we
will
of
course
be
taking
into
account
those
sites
nearby,
but
outside.
For
example,
we've
got
the
Mannings,
the
Civic
Center
and
the
focus
development
there,
because
of
course
you
can't
view
something
like
the
Worcester
Weston
Harbor
arm
in
a
bubble.
In
terms
of
these
things,
of
course,
there
are
different
catchment
areas
for
different
types
of
infrastructure,
so
I
want
to
emphasize
we
we
will
be
having
wider
conversations
about
surrounding
area
and,
of
course,
the
the
Ada
local
plan
area
as
a
whole.
F
F
As
I
say,
we
are
going
to
be
looking
at
what's
come
forward
and
comparing
it
to
the
Japan
and
the
local
plan
requirements.
The
review
obviously
can't
revoke
planning
permissions
which
already
been
granted
in
this
area
and
we're
also
we're
not
able
to
put
a
freeze
on
this
area.
We
can't
say
no
more
applications
in
Western
Harbor
arm
until
we
until
we
finish
the
review
that
that's
not
possible.
It's
not
not
lawful.
To
do
that.
F
The
review
report
itself
is
not
a
planning
policy
document,
but
what
it
can
do
is
inform
the
Ada
local
Plan
update
or
perhaps
some
other
informal
guidance
we
might
do
and
as
I
say,
the
design
code
again
can
create
guidance
for
the
the
area
and,
of
course,
as
I'm
sure
you're.
All
aware,
as
we've
already
mentioned,
the
the
Shoreham
Harbor
area
it,
it
is
integral
part
of
the
existing
local
plan
strategy,
particularly
in
terms
of
housing
delivery.
F
Regarding
time
scales,
unfortunately
moment
it's
difficult
to
give
you
anything
precise.
As
I
say,
work
has
commenced
on
part
one
and
we've
had
early
conversations
with
key
stakeholders,
but,
as
I
said,
it's
important
to
assess
infrastructure
in
terms
of
the
widerate
aid,
a
local
plan
work.
So
it's
going
to
it's
a
bit
chicken
and
egg.
It's
difficult
to
talk
about
one
site
with
one
site
without
looking
at
the
wider
area,
so
we
are
trying
to
do
site
assessments
for
The
Wider
area
at
the
same
time.
F
So
it's
like
it's
going
to
be
quite
iterative,
but
what
we
can
do
is
update.
Keep
you
updated
when
we've
got
clear
idea
of
time
scales
Etc
we
can.
We
can
let
you
know.
What's
what's
going
on,
we
stage
two
to
work
again.
That
will
use
some
of
the
elements
from
part
one,
but
we
can
commence
conversations
with
developers
and
start
looking
at.
F
Obviously
this
is
an
additional
piece
of
work
and
it's
a
very
valuable
piece
of
work
and
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
do
it
and
it
is
linked
with
the
aid
to
local
plan,
because
that
will
have
an
impact
on
the
Ada
local
plan
timetable
and
again,
when
we've
got
greater
Clarity,
we
we
will
come
back
and
and
let
you
know
exactly
the
the
predicted
time
scales
or
revised
time
scale
for
the
aid,
a
local
plan
process
itself.
F
So
the
recommendation
to
the
report
is:
is
there
any
comments
on
the
brief
are
to
be
forward
to
the
cabinet
member
for
a
generation?
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
G
Well,
I
suppose
that
the
first
thing
I
want
to
say
is
I'm
grateful
to
Maura
for
calling
this
review
an
opportunity,
rather
than
addition
to
our
workload,
because
I'm
very
conscious
that,
having
been
asked
to
take
on
this
brief
that
I
instigated
this
Western
Harbor
review
and
we're
talking
about
a
very
busy
team
of
people
who
are
working
their
socks
off,
and
this
is
I'm
sure,
has
added
added
to
what
they're
already
doing.
I'm.
G
Also
very
grateful
to
Maura
and
Chris
Jones
in
particular,
have
already
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
the
Western
Harbor
Arm
review
and
where,
where
it
is
where
it
is
already
because
I
think
you
know,
it's
probably
been
a
bit
like
someone
like
letting
off
an
indoor
firework
really
in
the
sense
that
they're
working
really
hard
and
I've
asked
them
to
try
and
help
me
to
understand
the
concerns
of
local
residents.
G
It's
a
tricky
issue
and
we've
all
experienced
it
in
planning
committee
meetings
over
the
last,
certainly
the
last
12
months
and
probably
slightly
longer
than
that.
It
is
a
tricky
issue
because
we
previously
agree.
You
know
we
have
a
previously
agreed
action
plan,
a
local
plan.
We've
got
Brownfield
sites
that
have
issues
such
as
contaminated
land,
flood
wall,
defense
issues
and
also
asking
developers
to
give
up
some
land
for
public
realm.
G
So
none
of
these
none
of
these
things
are
easy
to
piece
together.
We've
got
targets
set
by
government
for
housing
numbers,
but
but
I'm
looking
to
try
and
encourage
infrastructure
providers
to
factory
to
factor
in
this.
The
cumulative
effect,
and
certainly
the
last
year
that
I
spent
on
planning
and
the
conversations
I've
had
with
local
residence
groups
is
that
I'm,
very
conscious
of
the
cumulative
effects
and
the
pace
at
which
these
applications
were
coming
through.
G
So
for
me,
it
was
a
question
of
whilst
I
appreciate
we
can't
put
a
freeze
on
applications
coming
forward.
G
It
was
an
opportunity
for
us
to
just
pause
and
take
a
look
at
what
we've
previously
agreed
and
and
to
look
at
how
we
can
influence
infrastructure
providers
I
suppose
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
the
best
result
that
we
can
for
our
local
residents
and
just
briefly
because
I'm
sure
there
are
some
some
questions
and
I'll
do
my
best
to
answer
them,
but
I'm
going
to
lean
on
Myra
as
well
this
evening,
but
I'll
do
my
best
to
answer
whatever
questions.
G
You've
got
I
just
want
to
also
just
briefly
touch
upon
a
question
that
Chrissy
raised
at
the
outset
in
terms
of
getting
local
residents
involved.
I
did
say
when
I
was
asked
to
take
on
this
brief,
that
I
wanted
to
listen.
They
wanted
to
engage
I
wanted
to
consult
and
I
have
already
had
meetings
with
acts
with
area
with
the
shore
of
society
with
Shore
and
bicycle.
G
For
example,
I've
got
a
second
round
of
meetings
in
the
diary
with
these
people
already
well,
these
residence
groups
I
beg
your
pardon
already,
but
equally
the
other
thing
I
did
say
we
would
do
is
we
would
encourage
developers
to
consult
better
now,
we've
we've
only
made.
You
know,
we've
only
really
just
got
started
on
that,
because
I've
only
been
in
post
for
four
or
five
months,
and
obviously
we're
talking
about
the
last
two
or
three
applications
that
have
come
through.
G
Some
developers
have
taken
that
on
board
very
well
the
frost
development
which
was
which
was
rejected
last
week.
Nevertheless,
they
did
listen
to
us.
They
consulted
very
well
over
the
summer
over
a
longer
period
of
time
than
than
to
perhaps
they
they
might
have
been
expected
to
do
so
and
at
differing
times
in
the
day
and
and
so
that
that
was
encouraging
and
and
that's
how
local
residents
can
get
involved.
They
can
come
along
to
these
consultations.
G
They
can
make
their
views
known
and
these
views,
as
Gary's
alluded
to
earlier,
will
we
will
be
reported
back
to
to
planning
committee
so
that
that's
that's
another
way
in
which
we
can
in
which
we
can
do
that.
Other
developers
choose
not
to
maybe
listen
to
Our
advice
to
consult
better.
We
can
only
influence,
we
can't
we
can't
enforce,
but
that's
what
we'll
continue
to
try
and
do
so
there's
many
local
residents
can
come
and
see
what's
being
planned
and
discuss
with
them
as
possible,
so
but
other
than
that,
any
other.
G
A
Thank
you,
Council
need
class
and
thank
you
Maura,
so
it
is
for
the
committee
to
note,
but
if,
as
councilor
Nicholas
said,
if
you
have
questions
you
would
like
to
ask,
then
please
just
put
your
hand
up
and
I
will
take
them
in
order,
so
any
questions
at
all
for
either
Moira
or
counseling
class.
H
You
I
think
by
the
way,
I
think
this
is
an
excellent
project
which,
hopefully
will
will
work
well
and
bring.
Improvements,
am
I
right
and
to
kind
of
to
be
thinking
that
this
review
will
not
in
itself
make
a
difference
in
the
sense
that
applications
coming
to
this
committee
will
still
be
judged
on
the
the
local
plan
and
but
that
the
work
being
done
here
should
influence
changes
to
the
local
plan.
F
Yeah
that
that
so
the
the
document,
the
review
document
itself,
won't
be
a
policy
document,
but,
as
you
say,
it
will
influence
things
like
the
infrastructure
delivery
plan
or
any
update
to
it.
We
can,
we
can
develop,
it
will
feed
into
the
Ada
local
plan
review,
update.
We
might
be
able
to
produce
other
informal
guidance
as
well
so
itself.
As
you
say,
it
won't
form
policy,
but
it
can
influence
other
other
things.
G
The
the
reason
that
we
are
we
are
putting
this
if
you
like
through
a
formal
process,
is
so
this
is,
it
is
out
there
in
the
open
and
so
that
it
will
feed
into
the
Ada
local
plan
review.
It
would
have
been
very
easy
for
us
to
have
conducted
a
review
of
the
western
Harbor
arm
behind
closed
doors
if
you
like,
but
that's
not
what
I
wanted
to
do,
and
we
are
doing
this
and
the
formal
process
is
that
it
was
considered
by
informal
cabinet.
G
It
was
then
agreed
that
we
would
put
it
to
the
planning
committee
for
you
to
be
able
to
see
the
brief
and
we've
also
obviously
then
agreed
to
to
answer
questions
on
it
as
well
and,
as
Moore
has
already
stated
earlier
on,
we
will
give
you
regular
updates
on
on
where
we're
at
with
it
as
well.
So
that's
the
reason
and
therefore
it
will
then
feed
into
the
Ada
local
plan.
Review,
which
you
know
is,
is
the
next.
G
The
next
piece
of
the
jigsaw
and
I
think
we're
just
waiting
for
confirmation
on
the
working
party
that
we'll
look
at
that
local
plan
review.
So
this
review
will
feed
into
that.
H
H
I
I
get
the
impression
that
part
two
will
begin
before
part
one
is
is
completed,
but
I'm
just
wondering,
because
I
got
quite
excited
at
seeing
that
part.
Two
will
incorporate
assessment
of
potential
options
for
delivering
open
space,
because
I
think
that
will
be
fantastically
important
for
creating
a
good
place.
H
F
Exactly
we
we
still,
we
still
need
to
map
out
this
process
in
detail,
but
you're
absolutely
right.
It's
going
to
get
quite.
There
can
be
a
lot
of
different
scenarios.
So,
as
you
say,
we
we
will
be
be
modeling
these
these
sites
with
different
levels
of
Development
coming
forward,
but
then
another
another
option
or
other
options
will
include
those
sites
not
being
developed
and
open
space
being
being
there.
Instead,
what
are
the
implications
of
that
as
I
said
for
how?
How
would
things
like
the
flood
defense
War
be
paid
for
in
that
case?
F
If,
if
you
know
so
it
you're
right,
it
is
quite
complicated
again.
This
is
another
reason
why
I
don't
want
to
give
you
a
promise
you
as
time
scale
but
I
can't
we
can't
we
can't
be
sure
of
yet
so
it
will
be
quite
quite
sort
of
iterative
and
doing
lots
of
different
looking
at
things
in
lots
of
different
ways.
I
think.
F
G
G
So
I
think
also
bear
in
mind
that
the
what
is
also
part
of
this
review
is
perhaps,
is
potentially
looking
at
what
is
still
to
come
forward
and
how
we
can
influence
what
type
of
applications
and
developments
we
want
to
see.
Now
that
is
tricky
because
it
goes
back
to
this
conundrum
about
the
type
of
land
we're
talking
about
contaminated
land
requirement
for
a
flubble
defense
requirement
for
developers
to
build
in
the
fact
they've
got
to
give
away
some
of
their
land
for
public
Realm.
G
So
all
of
these
things
are
difficult,
but
we
are
conscious
that
some
of
the
issues
we've
had
are
on
scale
and
density,
for
example.
So,
therefore
you
know
we
we,
you
know
we
will
have
a
look
at
whether
we
can
influence
as
I
say
the
shape
of
what
comes
forward.
We
can't
we
I
mean
we
can
influence
it,
but
we
can't,
if
somebody
puts
in
an
application
for
a
you,
know,
a
a
a
development
which
is
three
blocks
of
eight
stories
high.
We
can't
prevent
them
from
doing
that.
G
H
That's
that's
very
helpful.
My
other
question
was
on
sustainability.
It
was
mentioned
the
the
six
areas
of
infrastructure
provision
that
are
being
looked
at
in
part.
One,
and
specifically
one
of
the
things
that
isn't
being
looked
at
is
infrastructure
around
sustainability
matters,
but
at
the
same
time
the
review
will
provide
an
opportunity
to
assess
how
well
developments
are
meeting
sustainability
policies.
H
So
the
review
is
looking
at
how
developers
are
meeting
developments
are
meeting
sustainability
policies
I
can't
help
but
feel
that
there
may
be
infrastructure
elements
that
emerge
from
from.
From
that
view,
I
would
also
say:
sustainability,
I
think,
is
something
which
is
quite
important
to
a
lot
of
local
people.
F
Shall
I
yeah
I
think
what
we're
referring
to
there
is
that
yeah
we
we
will
perhaps
need
to
set
this
out
clearly.
In
a
brief,
we
will
be
particularly
when
we're
looking
at
what's
coming
forward
from
developments.
The
first
sort
of
fact
check
stage.
F
One
of
the
things
we'll
we'll
be
looking
at
is
is
compared
to
the
existing
local
plan
and
Joint
air
action
plan
policies
are
the
sustainability
policies
in
those
documents
being
met,
so
that
should
come
out
the
first
part
of
that,
so
maybe
what
I
could
do
is
perhaps
make
that
a
big
bit
clearer
and
just
to
see
what's
coming
forward
and
again.
If,
if
it's,
if,
if
there's
an
indication
that
that
policies
really
aren't
being
met,
then
we
then
we
will
perhaps
have
to
divert
attention
and
spend
some
time
looking
at
those
but
yeah.
F
It's
looking
at
the
existing
policy
policy
base.
I
think.
G
G
But
again,
this
is
an
interesting
conversation,
because
we
talk
about
sustainability
and
I,
have
the
same
conversations
with
residence
groups
and
I'm
sure
we
can
have
them
again
when
we,
when
I
meet
with
them
again
later
in
the
month
and
I,
listen
to
the
planning
committee,
where
we're
when
you're
discussing
applications-
and
we
have
this
conundrum
about
about
traffic
mitigation
and
parking,
for
example,
and
we
talk
about
developments
that
come
through
and
how
they
don't
have
enough
parking
spaces
for
the
amount
of
flats
or
the
amount
of
units
that
are
going
in
there.
G
And
then
we
talk
about
increased
pollution
and
the
fact
that
we've
got
increased
traffic
and
how
we're
going
to
mitigate
parking.
So
this
is
this
is
something
you
know.
You
can't
square
that
Circle
and
and
I'm
on
record.
Having
voted
on
the
Civic
Center
site
of
saying
that
we
have
to
draw
a
line
in
the
sand
and
we
have
to
change
mindsets
on
usage
of
cars
now.
I
also
listened
at
the
last
planning
meeting
where
we
talked
about
the
frost
site,
not
being
a
town
center
site
and
I
would
take
issue
with
that.
G
G
It
takes
you
to
places
where
there
are
train
stations,
but
we
do
have
to
draw
a
line
in
the
sand
and
we
do
have
to
change
mindsets,
and
so
we
are
going
to
have
to
get
our
heads
around
a
situation
where
we
are
more
comfortable
with
fewer
parking
spaces,
because
we
have
to
drive
down
usage
of
the
motor
vehicle,
and
that
is
sustainability,
as
I
say,
touches
on
each
one
of
those
items,
and
you
know
and
I
think
that's
a
that's.
G
A
key
part
is
that
we've
got
to
we've
got
to
get
used
to
the
fact
that
we
are
going
to
have
developments
coming
forward
where
the
parking
spaces
don't
match
the
requirements
and
when
we
did
have
a
application
recently
where
there
was
almost
one-on-one
parking.
We
rejected
that
too.
So
you
know
this
is
a
circle.
We
cannot
well
a
square,
we
cannot
Circle
without
scope.
We
can't
Square,
which
our
way
around
is.
H
I
You,
my
I
suppose
my
my
thought
is
is
more
particularly
with
the
last
two
developments
that
have
been
rejected
that
there
there
certainly
is.
You
know
an
emphasis
on.
We
need
to
kind
of
forget
the
motor
car
a
little
bit.
I
I
just
wondered
whether
this
review
is
going
to
look
at
bringing
forward
infrastructure
like
cycle
Lane,
so
they
are
actually
in
place
before
this
stuff
actually
gets
built,
because
it
seems
very
back
to
front
at
the
moment
that
we're
talking
about
you
know
they're
gonna,
give
a
you
know,
last
week's
one
being
a
good
example
they're
going
to
give
a
bit
of
their
sight
to
a
cycle
Lane.
Well,
you
know.
If
these
people
aren't
going
to
be
moving
into
those
flats
and
parking
cars,
they
need
some
sort
of
infrastructure
there.
I
F
Yeah
we
we
are
working
with
continue
work
with
colleagues
at
County
about
how
we
can
bring
bring
these
things
forward.
So
you're
right
that
cycle
infrastructure
is
obviously
quite
important,
and
the
cycling
we're
talking
about
here
is
it's
obviously
sort
of
fundamental
to
the
to
the
area.
We'll
also
be
looking
at
whether
there
are
ways
of
improving
things
like
the
delivery
of
of
car
clubs
Etc.
F
So
you
can
still
have
access
to
a
car
if
you
need
it
without
having
to
own
your
own
kind
of
thing
so
that
and
whether
there
are
ways
we
we
as
a
local,
Authority
or
others
can
make
that
whole
process
easier
rather
than
each
each
developer
getting
their
own.
You
know
relationship
with
car
club.
Is
there
a
way
of
kind
of
making
things
easier?
So
we
all
share
our
approach
to
the
same
one.
F
So
it's
there
are
the
range
of
things
we
are
trying
to
look
at,
but
but
yes
you're,
absolutely
right,
that's
that's
quite
fundamental
again.
It
comes
back
to
delivery
and
funding,
of
course,
and
working
with
stakeholders
to
how
we
can
bring
these
things
forward.
G
I,
just
I
want
to
I
just
want
to
add
to
that
as
well.
You
might,
you
won't
be
surprised,
I'm
sure,
but
I
mean
I.
I.
Don't
disagree
with.
You
is
the
honest
answer
to
that
question,
but
the
issue
we've
had
in
the
past-
and
this
is
how
we're
working
hard
to
influence
Partners
like
West
Sussex,
for
example-
is
that,
unfortunately,
the
view
in
the
past
was
that
this
cycle
Lane
won't
be
completed
all
the
way
along
there
until
the
Western
Harbor
arm
is
built
out
and
therefore
you've
got
the
sum
total
of
the
section.
G
106
money
come
through.
So
all
the
time.
Every
time
a
planning
application
is
rejected,
you
can
argue
that
actually
it
it
halts
that
from
coming
forward
even
further.
Now
that's
not
a
reason
to
to
either
approve
or
reject
an
application.
But
that's
that's
the
simple
fact
and
conversations
I've
had
with
West
Sussex
would
suggest
that
they
would
expect
that
to
be
built
out
so
that,
once
it's
finished
now
you
could
you're
right.
You
can
argue
well,
hang
on.
Isn't
that
the
wrong
way
around
shouldn't,
we
get
the
infrastructure
right
first.
Well,
yes,
probably
where's!
G
The
money
you
know
where
where's
the
money
coming
from
to
get
it
right
first,
and
particularly
also
you
can't,
if
you
spend
all
that
money
on
all
that
and
then
the
applications
don't
come
forward
and
you
don't
get
them
built
out
anyway,
then
that
is
obviously
you
know
that
that's
another
issue
with
with
that.
With
that
approach
as
well
so
again,
I'm
afraid
there
is
no
easy
answer.
I
don't
disagree
with
you.
It
would
be
great
to
get
it
all
done
first
and
then
put
the
developments
afterwards,
but
the
reality
is
it.
G
It
hasn't
in
the
past,
work
that
way
around
and
we're
doing
our
best
to
influence
County
to
to
try
and
bring
that
forward
as
quickly
as
we
can.
I
Only
you
know
to
sort
of
follow
on
from
that,
whether
there's
any
engagement
with
bodies
like
active
travel
England,
for
example,
to
secure
funding,
maybe
in
a
different
way,
because
I
really
just
don't
understand
how
on
Earth
you
we
can
expect
people
to
move
into
those
Flats
with
you
know
no
car
parking
space
and
the
emphasis
to
be
on
them
to
cycle
to
work
and
provide
no
means
of
them
doing
that
and
I.
You
know:
I
fully
I
understand
the
point
about
that.
G
Yeah
I
think
I
mean
assessing
the
infrastructure
and
the
infrastructure
provision
is
is
a
key
part
of
this
review,
so
I'm
sure
options
such
as
the
one
you're
suggesting
will
will
be
looked
at.
The
other
thing
I
would
just
say
to.
You,
though,
is
that
you
know
just
along
the
road
in
Brighton
Hove.
There
are
plenty
of
developments
that
get
built
that
are
car
free
developments,
not
even
not
even
0.3
or
0.4
in
terms
of
parking
spaces
per
unit.
G
There
are
developments
which
are
built
which
are
car,
free
and
people
don't
even
have
parking
permits
to
park
in
the
road.
They
are
actively
discouraged
from
even
owning
a
car
but
I
I.
Absolutely
this
is
a
the
whole
point
of
this
review
is
to
look
at
infrastructure,
influence,
infrastructure
provision
and
I'm
sure
that
other
other
means
of
funding
will
be
looked
at.
I
So
yeah,
just
with
that
last
point,
I
just
feel
like
comparing
sure
and
with
Brian
and
Hove
is,
is
not
really
a
very
good
comparison.
I
think
they're
public
transport
in
Brighton
and
hope
is,
is
much
much
better
as
anybody
who's
waited
for
the
700
bus
and
you
know
it
just
doesn't
turn
up
or
takes
an
age
I.
Just
think
you
know.
The
infrastructure
in
Brighton
Hove
is
not
really
comparable,
which
means
that
they
can
build
more
developments
like
that.
J
Thank
you.
Yes,
just
a
few
questions,
I'll
be
as
quick
as
I
can.
First
off
just
this
is
I'm
a
really
exciting
review.
Thank
you
for
the
work
that's
gone
into
it
and
and
the
the
clear
thinking
that's
gone
behind
it.
J
Just
one
of
the
issues
about
I
know,
the
review
of
the
Ada
local
plan
will
have
a
formal
framework
for
contributions
and
submissions
to
that
from
the
public
and
organizations
I'm.
It's
really
good
that
you're
talking
to
local
people
as
part
of
this
review,
I've
spoken
to
many
members
of
the
public,
not
in
organizations
who
have
fantastic
imaginative
ideas
for
the
you
know,
I've
had
everything
from
shuttle
buses
along
the
259
linking
Shoreham
and
Southwick
stations.
J
Further
education
provision
on
on
difficult
to
build
sites,
bridges
over
the
railway
public
spaces,
developing
Kingston
Beach,
some
really
imaginative
thinking.
Could
there
be
a
semi-formal
opportunity
as
part
of
this
review,
for
people
to
actually
put
on
paper
ideas
and
thoughts
and
contributions
to
this
particular
review.
F
I
I
think,
where
we
are
now
is,
is
that
we've
got
some
of
the
the
broad
policy
requirements
are
are
in
place.
So
of
course,
we've
we've
got.
We
have
the
formal
allocations
for
housing,
employment
and
mixed
uses.
So
we
we
have
a
lot
of
those
principles
already
established
as
our
our
policy
framework.
Interestingly,
a
lot
of
the
things
that
you
you've
mentioned,
such
as
the
shuttle
buses.
You
know
bridges
over
the
railway
line,
I
mean
I
I.
F
A
lot
of
those
things
have
been
looked
at
in
the
past
the
early
days
of
this
project
and
due
to
sort
of
viability,
matters,
Etc,
we've
sort
of
had
to
sort
of
refine
the
proposals
down
to
to
what
we
see
in
front
of
us
now,
I
must
have
we
we
haven't
built
into
actual
consultation
into
the
the
review
as
I
say,
because
we
do
already
have
a
a
policy
framework
development
which,
which
was
developed
with
public
consultation
in
front
of
us
and
I
I.
F
It
will
be
I
think
the
the
review
will
be
quite
technical
in
terms
of
things
like
viability,
land
values,
Etc
delivery
finances,
Etc
and
I
I
think
we
probably
need
to
be
perhaps
guided
because
I
say
by
the
principles
we've
we've
already
established
and
and
the
legal
framework
we're
working
but
as
I
say,
perhaps
I
think
the
part
two
area,
the
the
place
making
Etc
the
place.
Making
side
of
things
is
perhaps
where
we
we
benefit
from
most
public
involvement.
J
Yes,
I
mean
I,
don't
agree
with
that,
but
I
I'm
I
hear
what
you're
saying
just
in
terms
of
you
mentioned
the
design
work
stage.
You've
got
a
consultant
or
somebody
lined
up
without
who
is
that
please?
What
organizing.
F
Sorry
we're
getting
someone
to
help
with
the
actual
undertaking
of
the
I.
F
Don't
I,
don't
have
a
a
confirmed,
name,
I
think
you're
still
waiting
to
put
papers
to
be
signed
Etc,
we
are
getting
someone
to
to
help
part-time
on
the
on
the
administering
of
the
part,
two
as
a
whole,
but
what
I
was
suggesting
earlier
is
that
when
we
actually
do
the
design
code
work,
it
would
make
sense,
then,
to
get
a
specialist
who's
who's
used
to
design
a
sort
of
place,
making
type
projects
who
understands
planning
and
is
also
used
to
working
with
with
local
people,
because
that's
quite
a
a
skill
in
itself
and
we
want
someone
who's
who's
used
to
doing
that
and
has
experience
of
that
to
say
we
it's
early
days.
F
We
haven't,
we
haven't
secured
anyone
for
that,
but
we,
but
we
we
will
be
in
in
due
course
thank.
A
G
So
I
think
what
I
think
I
think
what
I'm
allowed
to
say
because
I
did
check
this
before,
but
we
we
have.
We
have.
We
are
appointing
a
project
officer
to
to
look
after
this
Western
Harbor
arm
and
Western
Harbor
Arm
review,
specifically
so
that
it's
somebody
that
will
be
able
to
liaise
with
the
infrastructure
providers,
for
example,
so
that
the
planning
team
are
incredibly
busy
and
you
know
so.
We
have.
G
We
have
got
some
extra
resource
to
have
a
western
Harbor
armed
project
officer,
so
they
will
be
doing
that
that
liaison
as
I
say
with
with
infrastructure
providers
such
as
West
Sussex,
such
as
Southern
water,
for
example,
and
just
while
and
while
I
mentioned
Southern
water.
Again,
there
was
a
question
on,
or
some
just
some
debate
last
week
about
southern
water
and
about
us
encouraging
them
to
look
at
the
cumulative
effect
because
I
was
in
the
audience.
What
I
wasn't
able
to
say
to
you
was
that
we
have.
G
We
have
actually
gone
back
to
them.
Recently,
foreign
we've
gone
back
to
the
recently
with
comments
on
a
on
a
paper
about
the
drainage
of
what
Waste
Water
Management
plan.
So
we
were
asked
to
comment
on
that,
and
we
have
done
so
and
our
response
highlights
the
concerns
that
have
been
raised
and
asked
them
to
look
at
not
just
developments
that
are
coming
through
piecemeal,
but
the
cumulative
effect.
So
we
we
are
already
on
that.
J
F
I,
don't
think
turn
to
my
my
colleagues
in
in
development
control
and
legal
I.
Don't
think
we
as
playing
Authority
I,
think
if
someone
submits
an
application
which
is
a
duly
made
application
to
us,
we
have
a
legal
duty
to
determine
it.
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
way
of
of
of
of
ceasing
that
as
I
understand
as
we
are
a
we
are
the
legal
planning
Authority.
We
have
a
duty
to
determine
applications,
Gary
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
jump
in
well.
D
That's
right,
the
application
is
submitted,
it
has
to
be
considered
and
as
we've
with
any
application,
if
it's
not
determined
within
a
statutory
time
limit,
then
the
applicant
has
the
right
of
an
appeal
so
for
a
major
development
after
13
weeks,
if
it's
not
determined
by,
then
they
could
go
to
the
inspector
for
appeal
against
non-determination
and
the
plan
inspector
will
look
at
our
local
plan
policies
and
determine
applications
accordingly,
and
you
know
that
is
always
a
risk,
because
our
housing
Supply
position
is
not
great
because
of
a
you
know,
for
many
reasons,
including
the
constrained
location
we're
in.
D
So
there
is
a
difficulty
there,
I
think,
probably
from
a
planning
application
point
of
view.
All
you
can
do
is
move
forward
on
reviews
like
this.
That
can
be
brought
to
an
attention
to
a
developer,
even
if
it
holds
no
policy
waste.
The
outset,
when
a
developer
makes
an
initial
contact
with
with
officers,
for
example,
they
might
say
well
what
are
you
looking
for?
You
know.
D
Is
there
anything
else
I
can
I
can
look
at
then
you
can
point
the
way
to
this
sort
of
thing,
but
unfortunately
the
planning
application
system
is
is
such
that
what
we
we
never
want,
which
I
think
is
the
worst
thing,
is
appeals
being
determined
by
a
planning
Spectrum
before
this
committee's
had
a
chance
to
determine
themselves,
because
that
is
almost
the
worst
form
of
non-democracy.
If
you
like.
A
Thank
you,
thank
you,
everybody
and
then
no
more
questions
then
we'll
finish
this
part
and
thank
you
Maura.
Thank
you,
councilor
Nicholas,
for
your
very
helpful
and
very
good
review.
So
thank
you
and
we'll
start
on
the
first
of
the
planning
applications.
Now
this
is
awdm123022.
This
is
Ashcroft
100,
Kingston,
Lane
sure
and
by
sea
and
I'm
going
to
hand
you
over
to
Peter
Barnett
to
talk
us
through
this
application.
Thank
you.
K
K
That's
the
view
from
looking
at
the
building.
You
can
see
it's
it's
quite
well,
hidden
at
the
moment
being
so
far
set
back
and
with
that
green
Frontage
and
then
looking
at
this
Southern
access
again,
the
listed
building
in
the
foreground
just
see
that
there
and
a
number
of
trees
within
the
entrance
there.
K
This
is
the
proposal
it's
for
a
new
three-story
building
to
be
brought
much
further
forward
in
the
site.
The
vegetation
along
the
frontage
is
to
be
cleared,
but
the
street
trees
are
to
be
retained
there.
So
there
will
be
quite
a
significant
visual
impact
on
the
street
scene
there,
but
The
Proposal,
we
feel
is,
can
be
quite
a
striking
addition
to
to
the
street
scene
and
obviously
we'll
provide
44
Flats,
which
is
an
increase
of
23
from
the
existing,
so
there'll
be
a
total
of
52
sheltered
housing
units
in
in
total,
including
the
bungalows.
K
So
it's
quite
a
contemporary
design,
but
with
a
nod
to
the
existing
vernacular
in
the
area
with
a
mixture
of
red
and
gray
brick.
Some
feature
brick
work
in
in
various
places,
a
new
Frontage
wall
at
the
southern
end,
but
also
a
lower
wall
with
railings.
At
the
other
end,
with
some
planting
behind
to
help
soften
the
frontage.
K
The
design
obviously
provides
a
much
larger
building
much
closer
to
the
road,
but
it's
been
broken
up
to
try
and
reduce
the
bulk
and
massing
of
the
building,
and
this
just
shows
the
front
elevation
and
then
below.
That
just
indicates
how
we've
got
effectively
three
sections
to
the
building
separated
by
stairways
and
and
the
entrance
way
there.
K
K
K
We
have
balconies
at
the
front
there
and
a
glazed
entrance
way,
pitched
roof
recessed
windows,
and
so
this
gives
you
an
idea
of
the
difference
in
terms
of
the
site
coverage
compared
to
the
existing.
So
the
existing
buildings
sort
of
centrally
placed
here
and
obviously
this
is
going
to
provide
a
much
greater
coverage
of
development,
but
it's
a
more
efficient
use
of
the
site
and
it
doesn't
provide,
as
I
say,
a
much
greater
density
of
units
which
is
much
needed
in
the
district.
K
There
was
a
ramped
entrance
way
here,
which
was
running
much
closer
to
the
front
entrance
front
boundary,
so
we've
managed
to
get
that
set
back
slightly
to
allow
more
planting
along
this
Frontage
and
key
trees
are
being
retained
within
the
site,
plus
a
new
landscaped
Garden
to
provide
a
much
more
formalized
and
more
attractive
use
of
the
site.
K
K
In
terms
of
the
national
planning
policy
framework,
it
could
be
described
as
being
less
than
substantial
harm
being
caused
to
the
Conservation
Area,
but
that
harm
is
outweighed
by
the
public
benefit.
We
feel
of
providing
the
The
increased
number
of
units
and
a
better,
more
modern
and
good
design
of
building
which
will
actually
enhance
that
part
of
the
area.
K
So
the
recommendation
is
slightly
different
to
what
is
shown
in
the
report,
because
there
is
a
section
106
agreement
which
needs
to
be
completed
for
highways
contributions,
so
the
recommendation
would
be
to
approve
the
development
with
their
final
decision
to
issue
the
plan
permission
to
be
delegated
to
the
head
of
planning
once
that
106
agreement
has
been
completed.
Thank
you.
L
It's
just
really
regarding
the
service
water,
drainage,
there's
a
lot
said
about
it
there
what
you're
looking
for
you
know,
but
what
happened
previously,
because
you
know
people
living
there
before
so
how
did
the
trainees
work?
How
was
it
operated
at
that
time?.
K
Well,
I
think
the
comments
relate
because
obviously,
we've
got
a
greater
density
of
development,
a
greater
footprint
of
building
and
therefore
more
hard
surface
being
being
taken
up.
K
So
I
couldn't
tell
you
precisely
how
the
previous
scheme
was
drained,
but
there
is
agreement
in
principle
with
the
drainage
proposals
and
in
on
this
occasion
our
Engineers
are
happy
with
the
condition
to
cover
drainage
details,
because
it
has
been
indicated
initially
that
they
can
provide
a
scheme
successfully
and
just
the
final
details
that
need
to
be
agreed
on
that.
H
The
at
the
back
of
this
site
right
now
is
quite
a
massive
vegetation
and,
and
the
residents
who
live
in
Ashcroft,
close,
don't
as
far
as
one
can
see,
don't
have
proper
fences
separating
them
from
this
site.
H
K
Yes,
they
would
be
new
walls
or
fences
along
the
whole
boundary.
The
final
details
can
be
reserved
by
condition,
but
I
think
it's
indicated
as
a
fence.
At
the
moment.
H
There's
you
know
it's,
but
anyway,
what
I
was
going
to
ask
was
these
are
very
big
trees
and
there's
a
reference
in
the
report
to
the
street
trees
which
may
we
there
may
need
to
be
some
cooperation
from
them
to
allow
dappled
light
to
pass
I
presume
that
them
means
the
County
Council,
rather
than
the
the
trees
themselves,
but
I'm
just
wondering
what
what
that
means
is
is
the
thought
that
work
will
be
done
on
those
Street
trees,
which
would
further
change
the
Street
Scene.
K
Well,
there
would
need
to
be
some
maintenance
of
the
trees
to
ensure
that
the
branches
don't
reach
over
and
start
obscuring
the
building
or
interfering
with
the
building,
but
the
distance
is
sufficient
to
I
would
have
thought
just
have
minor,
shaping
Works
rather
than
significant.
You
know,
cutting
back
of
major
branches,
so
the
height
in
the
form
of
the
tree
should
remain
as
they
are,
but
on
the
side
of
the
building
they'll
just
be,
the
branches
will
be
chopped
back
a
little
bit
more.
M
You
and
sheltered
housing
and
we've
got
people
there
with
mobility
issues.
You
were
mentioned,
the
stairways.
Are
there
going
to
be
any
lifts
in
this
buildings?
I
can't
see
any
mention
of
it
in
the
pack.
Thank
you.
K
Yes,
there
are
so
I
can
just
have
a
look
at
that
I
think
there's
some
lifts
I
think
potentially
in
the
center
there.
K
A
Thank
you
Peter.
If
I
could
just
ask
a
question,
there's
quite
a
lot
of
Green
Landscaping,
which
is
really
nice
to
see,
and
you've
got
one
area
of
particularly
set
Garden,
who
is
actually
going
to
be
looking
after
this
is
going
to
be
our
Council
Ada
Council
or
our
eyes
are
actually
going
to
be
a
designated
company
that
will
be
looking
after
this,
because
it's
quite
a
lot
of
open
space.
There.
A
J
Yeah,
just
for
my
learning
really
so
this
this
will
be
an
ADA
homes
development,
but
it's
a
a
developer,
doing
the
work
just.
How
does
that
work
that
relationship
with
the
developer
and
basically
the
these
are
Ada
Council
homes?
How
does
how
does
that
work?
Yes,.
A
A
O
Yeah
it's
a
bit
of
a
mixture
in
terms
of
it
will
be
the
council's
responsibility,
but
I
know
they
tend
with
these
schemes
to
get
local
volunteers
within
the
development.
O
Everything
you
see
on
the
left
hand
side
is
that
their
food
growing
areas
for
the
residents
to
use
and
things
like
that
and
then
most
most
of
the
other
Green
Space
within
the
central
Courtyard,
are
going
to
be
planted
beds
with
minimal
maintenance
using
some
of
the
surface
water
runoff
as
well,
so
that
you
know
it,
the
maintenance
requirements
are
as
low
as
possible.
O
A
O
Absolutely
thank
you.
I'll
probably
cover
some
of
those
points
rather
than
running
off
a
general
speech,
but
as
Peter
says,
this
is
a
council
Insight.
It's
been
closed
since
January
2020,
and
so
there
was
a
report
that
went
to
your
joint
strategic
Committee
in
July
2021
to
basically
outline
the
options
that
are
available
to
the
council,
which
included
refurbishment
of
the
entire
building
or
the
pros
we
have
now.
O
The
refurbishment
option
would
have
required
the
loss
of
units
so
the
previously
21
sheltered
housing
units
there
to
refurbish
it
to
Modern
standards,
space
standards
and
fire
safety
regulations.
It
would
have
gone
down
to
13
units,
so
loss
of
eight
units
and
it
would
have
cost
between
a
quarter
of
a
million
and
300
000
per
unit.
So
the
business
case
just
wasn't
there.
It
would
have
been
easier
to
go
to
the
market
and
buy
Flats
off
the
market
on
bedroom
Flats.
O
So
that's
that's.
Where
we've
got
to
how
we've
got
to
the
situation
now,
obviously,
it's
quite
a
large
site
with
an
opportunity
to
make
it
a
real
asset
for
the
district
and
provide
a
modern
building.
O
That
really
was
the
whole
aims
to
be
an
Exemplar
development
for
sheltered
housing,
really
low
carbon,
really
high
quality
of
accessibility
and
lots
of
communal
and
social
spaces
within
the
site,
while
still
giving
people
a
self-contained
apartment
and
yeah
just
something
of
real
quality
for
residents.
O
O
It
will
separate
those
two,
so
the
surface
water
will
has
a
lot
of
attenuation
on
site,
so
it
can
be
stored
on
site
until
it
naturally
runs
off
into
the
soil
at
a
controlled
rate
and
therefore
it
will
significantly
improve
the
drainage
situation.
From
the
current
situation
and
I
mean
the
the
valve
sewer
isn't
getting
any
surface
water
drainage,
it
doesn't
need
I,
think
that's
everything
from
me
but
feel
free
to
ask
questions.
A
O
There
won't
be
any
on-site
Management
on
a
permanent
basis.
Obviously
it's
a
Ada
project.
It's
the
major
projects
and
investment
team
leading
on
it,
so
they
will
manage
the
security
and
the
maintenance
and
all
those
requirements
there.
J
Yeah
just
on
the
surface
water
issue,
I
was
there
and
I
can
see
that
their
plans
being
put
into
place
to
deal
with
that.
Are
there
any
thoughts
to
use
some
of
that
to
improve
the
amenity
of
the
site,
so
I'm
I'm
thinking
of
things
like
ponds,
and
that
kind
of
thing
has
that
been
considered
up
to
the
moment
and
and
could
it
be
yeah.
O
It's
definitely
formed
part
of
the
consideration.
We
had
quite
lengthy
back
and
forces
your
drainage
officer
just
to
find
a
solution
that
works
and
allows
infiltration
on
the
site.
O
O
I
Yeah,
just
I
mean
I'm,
not
sure
if
I've
missed
it
where's
the
sort
of
renewable
energy
here,
why?
Why
are
there
not
solar
panels
in
the
roof
to
sort
of
reduce
the
cost
of
energy
that
that's
that's
used?
I
would
kind
of
expect
to
see
that
really
in
any
new
application
that
the
council
is
bringing
forward.
O
Yeah,
the
I
think
there's
a
potential
for
some
solar
PVS,
but
because
of
the
roof
orientation,
it's
quite
ineffective
and
the
the
layout
of
the
site
has
been
designed
to
take
advantage
of
being
able
to
create
this
safe
Courtyard
internally.
So
it's
actually
something
people
can
use,
rather
than
this
current
situation,
where
you've
got
a
turning
circle
out
the
front
of
the
building
and
green
space
that
no
one
ever
uses.
O
So
that's
why
we've
ended
up
with
the
shape
of
the
building,
and
that
obviously
has
a
bit
of
a
knock-on
effect
on
using
solar
that
the
entire
site
is
fully
electric
powered
by
air
source
heat
pumps.
So
it's
going
to
be
a
significant
production.
It's
55
over
the
building
regulations
requirement
in
terms
of
carbon
savings
at
the
moment
and
then
obviously,
as
the
National
Grid
gets
cleaner,
it
will
eventually
be
zero
carbon
in
terms
of
the
energy
use.
O
So
we've
achieved
really
high
levels
in
terms
of
carbon
use
through
that
and
so
I
I
I'll
have
to
double
check.
I
think
there
is
a
small
element
of
solar,
but
it
is
just
kind
of
topping
up.
What's
what's
done
on
site.
M
O
So
it
went
to
it
had
an
internal
review,
I
think
with
some
executive
members
just
before
the
submission
went
in
to
make
sure
that
those
assumptions
were
correct
and
obviously
it
will
be
something
that
has
to
be
continually
reviewed
as
as
things
progress.
But
the
idea
is
to
move
quite
quickly
so
that
those
assumptions
are
already
figured
out
and
it
doesn't
change
too
much.
A
P
You
chair,
looking
at
the
application
as
considered
with
an
old
building,
that's
been
empty
for
a
long
time.
P
It's
one
of
those
things
where,
although
you're
losing
that
building
the
benefit
of
a
new
up-to-date
building
is
going
to
be
a
much
better
addition
to
the
housing
need
for
the
accommodation,
the
energy
requirements
and
stuff
like
that.
As
I
know,
through
experience
with
old
buildings,
Energy
Efficiency
is
a
lot
worse
and
with
the
modern
building
regs
and
the
new
insulation,
the
building
would
be
a
lot
better
benefit.
P
So
I
think
looking
at
the
sort
of
pros
and
cons
to
it,
I
think
there's
a
lot
more
Pros
on
the
application
than
cons,
I,
think
most
of
the
conditions
listed
with
the
drainage
reports
and
so
on
from
there
pretty
much
cover
any
concerns
going
forward
and
I
think
that
a
building
that's
been
sitting
empty
for
two
years
now
is
not
benefiting
anybody
and
I.
Think
a
sorry
of
this
sort
of
size
would
be
a
much
bigger
benefit
to
everyone.
If
we
move
on
with
it.
A
A
M
A
P
Can
I
propose
that
we.
L
L
A
D
A
P
Thanks
Jay
can
I
propose
that
we
approve
the
application
with
the
delegation
to
the
officer
to
secure
the
106.
A
You
cancer
panel,
yes,
and
also
to
bear
in
mind
the
amount
of
contributions
and
also
conditions,
so
do
I
have
a
second
of
that.
Yes,
councilor
Shin
you're
seconding.
It.
A
K
So
this
is
a
site
at
Riverside.
Well,
it's
on
Albion
Street,
but
it's
in
the
Riverside
Conservation
Area
in
Southwick
backing
onto
the
marina
there
to
the
conservation
area,
boundary
a
very
small
one
cluster
of
buildings
and
it's
the
site
here,
which
is
the
the
Old
Town
Hall
car
park,
which
is
a
gap
in
the
conservation
area
at
the
moment
which
has
been
identified
in
the
short
Southwick,
Conservation,
Area
appraisal
as
being
unsightly
and
which
would
benefit
from
being
filled
by
some
form
of
development.
K
That's
a
view
from
the
street
showing
the
Old
Town
Hall,
which
has
consent
to
be
converted
into
Flats
and
then
on
the
other
side.
You
have
the
another
vacant
building
which
is
the
arrow
tires
building,
and
there
is
an
application
in
for
redevelopment
of
that
site
as
well,
and
that's
currently
under
discussion.
K
K
This
is
the
view
from
the
harbor
to
the
South.
You've
got
a
listed
building
in
the
foreground
here,
which
is
the
old
yacht
club,
and
you
notice
it's
obviously
at
a
lower
level.
So
the
new
building
will
sit
in
this
Gap
here
above
the
well,
partly
above
the
listed
building
and
partly
above
North
house
cottage.
K
K
A
gap
has
been
maintained
to
ensure
it
doesn't
over
cramp
the
the
town
hall
setting
it's
a
lower
building,
so
it
doesn't
dominate
The
Town
Hall.
K
At
the
rear,
these
dotted
lines
that
indicate
the
existing
building.
So
that's
the
that's
the
yacht
club
building
there-
and
this
is
malt
house
cottage.
So
a
lot
of
this
building
will
be
screened,
but
it's
a
fairly
subtle
real
elevation
anyway,
with
a
pitched
roof.
Slate
tiles
and
three
Dormer
windows
set
within
the
eaves
is
currently
showing
that
only
the
windows
at
the
East
at
the
Western
end
are
going
to
be
obscure
glaze.
K
K
And
this
floor
plan
just
indicates
that
a
bit
better,
so
you
have
a
flat
roof
section
on
the
top
which
is
going
to
be
hidden
by
by
the
pitched
roof
around
it
and
that'll
be
a
good
place
for
some
solar
panels.
There's
also
some
air
source
heat
pumps
within
this
building
as
well.
So
it's
going
to
be.
The
idea
is
to
build
it
to
a
briam,
excellent
standard.
K
And
then,
just
to
show
you
the
floor
plans,
we
have
eight
parking
spaces,
six
of
which
are
going
to
be
used
by
the
occupants
of
the
flats.
It's
the
same
owner
of
both
sites
and
two
of
the
two
of
the
parking
spaces
to
be
used
by
the
office
users.
There's
also
a
cycle
store
and
it's
literally
a
two-minute
walk
from
Southwick
railway
station.
K
And
then
on
the
upper
floors,
you
have
the
office
suites,
and
these
are
the
windows
that
will
face
South,
but
they
only
serve
a
corridor
so
by
being
obscure
glazed.
The
impact
on
on
next
door
should
not
be
harmful,
so
we
feel
that
the
building
is
going
to
be
an
enhancement
to
this
Conservation
Area.
It
will
fill
in
that
unsightly
Gap
without
harming
the
setting
of
the
town
hall
or
the
the
amenities
of
neighboring
properties
and
is
therefore
recommended
for
approval.
Thank
you.
A
N
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
chair
I,
think,
excuse
me.
One
of
the
things
I've
picked
up
on
here
was
the
surface
seems
to
become
a
theme
and
everything
this
surface
water,
drainage-
and
it
says
here
that
this
is
not
acceptable.
There
are
no
public
surface
water,
sewers
in
proximity
to
this
site.
N
K
K
Yes,
that's
it's
on
the
recommendation,
condition.
J
Just
on
the
Obscure
Windows,
how
secure
is
it
for
the
people
living
at
the
back
that
those
are
going
to
remain
obscured
Windows
is.
Is
that
something
that
can
be
changed
after
the
building's
built?
Or
is
there
any
way
of
securing
that
I?
Don't
know
covenants
and
that
kind
of
thing
I,
don't
know
how
that
works.
K
H
I'll
mention
car
parking,
the
it's
it's
mentioned
here
that,
given
the
number
of
car
parking
spaces,
there
would
be
an
over
spill
of
no
more
than
seven
vehicles,
in
other
words,
seven
Vehicles
trying
to
fit
themselves
on
a
road
somewhere
around
there,
which
is
extremely
difficult.
But
I
noticed
that
in
writing
the
report
you
you
envisage
that
some
people
might
want
to
park
on
the
pavement
and
on
page
24
and
I.
H
H
Is
there
anything
we
can
and
I
think
it
would
be
really
bad
for
people
to
park
on
the
pavement,
but
there's
a
real
danger
of
that
happening
there
and
I
think
it's
bad,
particularly
because
there's
not
only
offices
but
there's
there's
going
to
be
Flats
around
so
more
people
using
the
pavement.
Is
there
anything
that
can
be
done
to
to
make
it
more
difficult
or
to
whether
it's
warning
signs,
whether
it's
CCTV,
whether
it's
bollard's
to
to
stop
people
parking
on
the
pavement,
because
I
think
it
could
be
a
real
problem?
There.
K
So
they're
fairly
standard
comments
that
they
put
in
they're,
basically
saying
that
they
don't
see
parking
on
the
footwears
being
an
issue
but
obviously
hear
what
you
say:
you've
got
an
access
way
into
the
parking
area
across
much
of
the
building,
so
you
couldn't
obviously
park
there
to
block
that
I.
K
Don't
I,
don't
see
that
people
would
want
to
park
on
the
on
the
the
pavement
there,
whether
you
want
to
put
some
Bollard
or
something
in
front,
but
it's
whether
that's
going
to
be
an
attractive
feature
or
whether
that's
going
to
hinder
people
using
the
footpath
I,
don't
know
I
mean
there's
it's
a
difficult
one
to
to
resolve.
I,
don't
know
if
you've
got
any
ideas.
Gary.
A
K
Even
it's
very
narrow
at
that
point,
so
I
think
if
you
couldn't
get
a
car
on
there
without
it
actually
straddling
the
highway,
so
it'd
be
extremely
dangerous
and
I.
Just
I
just
wouldn't
have
thought
it
would
happen.
I
think
it'd
be
a
very
dangerous
maneuver
which
should
soon
be
stopped
by
a
policeman,
I'm
sure.
D
Yeah,
so
just
just
the
the
purpose
of
decision
making
process
for
the
committee
and
I
think
that
I'm
not
entirely
sure
I've
gone
into
the
19th
century
highways
acts
and
so
on.
I'm,
not
sure
we
normally
get
that
one.
D
We
do
normally
get
the
Town
and
Country
highways
Act
of
1980,
whatever
it's
called
the
the
point
is:
if
you
want
to
prevent
that,
there
is
other
legislation
and
that
that's
really,
what
is
important
in
decision
making
process
is
that
if
a
matter
can
be
controlled
by
other
legislation,
then
it's
not
necessary
for
the
committee
to
refuse
an
application
that
basis.
In
other
words,
you
could
look
at
preventative
measures
to
prevent
potential
car
parking
on
the
footpath,
but
the
point
that's
being
made
is
well
that
can
be
controlled
elsewhere.
D
Now,
of
course,
we
could
all
have
our
doubts
as
to
we
can
drive
around
the
town
and
spot.
No
doubt
it
doesn't
cast
Parts
on
the
footpath
and
no
traffic
wardens
have
done
anything
about
it.
But
the
point
is
that,
in
terms
of
a
potential
refusal
reason
for
plant
application
that
basis,
it
would
be
a
difficult
one
to
carry
because
there's
other
legislation.
Oh.
H
Refusal,
it
was
just
it
would
be
done
and
I
think
that
image
there
shows
that
you
could
quite
easily
Park
cars
on
pavement
once
there's
another
once
there's
an
office
block
there,
so
I
I
think
we
should
be
seeking
something
to
encourage
the
developers
to
consider
what
they
can
do
to
stop.
Even
if
it's
a
sign,
if
it's
CCTV,
obviously
they
can't
put
bollards
up,
but
you
know
I
do
think
we
should
be
wary
of
that
as
a
as
a
as
a
risk.
I'm,
certainly
not
saying
we
should
turn
it
down
on
those
grounds.
A
P
Thank
you,
chair,
I'm,
very
familiar
with
the
area.
I've
spent
a
lot
of
my
youth
down
there
and
done
a
lot
of
work
in
the
area.
If
you
look
at
slide
number
12,
the
town
hall
has
there's
a
yellow
strip
running
down
the
side.
That's
currently
used
for
parking
as
well
to
the
left,
which
would
be
the
west
of
the
Town
Hall
that
strip.
There
is
currently
used
for
parking
for
people
that
use
the
town
hall,
so
they
don't
just
rely
on
that
car
park.
P
There
also
The
Lady
B
Marina,
which
is
located
to
the
West
as
well
has
a
large
car
park.
I
personally
have
a
parking
permit
for
there,
which
you
can
obtain
from
the
harbor.
So
perhaps
those
people
that
are
working
in
those
offices
could
approach
the
harbor
also
for
a
parking
permit.
P
N
No
in
the
plans,
sorry.
N
I
just
have
a
picture
of
something
here
that
was
made
him
on
the
representations.
It
says
spaces
four
and
eight
on
the
current
plan
would
not
be
easily
accessible
due
to
position
of
the
adjacent
boundary
wall.
Internal
columns,
so
I
just
wanted
to
actually
see
a
picture.
A
larger
picture
of
what
those
spaces
looked
like
compared
to
the
others.
A
Q
I,
probably
don't
need
to
say
too
much
so
a
bit
quick
scheme
before
you
is
really
for
quite
refreshingly
for
employment
floor
space,
which
you
don't
get
that
many
applications
for
roughly
200
square
meters
of
employment
space
which
could
create
up
to
20
jobs.
Q
The
design
has
been
really
taken
in
to
reflect
the
street
scene,
so
you've
got
three
strong
Gable
features
to
set
up
a
nice
set
of
Rhythm
and
articulation
and,
as
you
can
see
from
that
image
there,
the
eaves
line
is
below
the
eaves
of
the
Old
Town
Hall,
and
the
ridge
line
is
lower
too.
So
you've
got
that
subservience
that
you
want
to
get
with
new
development
and
the
two
and
a
half
meter
Gap
to
the
town
hall.
Q
It
is
a
sustainable
location.
You've
been
given
the
figures
about
distances
to
train
stations
Etc
and
the
scheme
takes
advantage
of
that.
It's
over
providing
on
cycle
parking,
so
you've
got
eight
spaces
for
the
flats
in
the
town
hall
and
eight
for
the
commercial
element,
and
that
includes
a
toilet,
changing
area
for
people
using
those
facilities.
Q
The
transport
report
that
comes
in
with
the
application
picked
up
on
your
comment
about
over
spill
car
parking
and
it's
actually
what
Steve
Reeves
found
was.
You
can
see
it
in
some
of
the
old
historical
street
view,
pictures
for
the
area
and
I
think
the
problem
is,
is
when
you
go
back
to
that
picture
of
the
car
park.
Q
It's
effectively
lazy
car
parking.
You
can
just
bounce
up
the
pavement
and
drop
your
car
off,
there's
no
physical
barrier
to
how
you
might
park
your
car.
Q
Obviously,
with
the
scheme
that's
being
proposed,
you've
got
a
central
entrance.
You
can't
sort
of
straddle
the
building,
so
I
think
it's
gonna.
That's
gonna
help
manage
it
quite
well,
and
then
it
becomes
more
of
a
sort
of
a
defensible
barrier
in
terms
of
sustainability.
Q
Just
to
reconfirm
it
is
going
to
be
code
for
sustainable
3M
excellent,
so
that's
as
high
as
you
can
get
for
a
commercial
building
and
just
to
confirm
also
there's
no
objection
to
a
planning,
condition,
saying
obscure
glazing
for
the
rear
windows,
so
that
can
be
confirmed
and
that's
preserved
in
perpetuity.
A
J
Just
on
the
on
the
brickwork,
obviously
it's
going
to
be
important
and
as
you've
as
it
says,
in
the
application
it's
going
to
try
and
reflect
as
much
as
possible
the
external
nature
of
the
Town
Hall.
Is
that
going
to
be
new
brick?
How
do
you
go
about
that?
Is
it
I'm,
not
a
Constructor
I'm,
just
interesting
how
you
try
and
match
that
that
do
that
matching
process
at.
Q
The
moment
it's
just
specified
as
brick
and
so
I
really
don't
think
they've
gone
into
that
level
of
detail
yet
as
to
which
specific
brick
we've
found
as
a
company
over
about
the
last
two
or
three
years.
Its
availability
now
is
as
much
a
problem
as
anything
else,
and
it
really
is
difficult,
getting
hold
of
bricks
and
being
to
set
in
your
ways
when
you
design
the
building
as
to
what
brick
is
going
to
be
because
you're
likely
to
find
fonts
you've
gone
for
a
sort
of
a
year
of
the
planning
process.
Q
That
availability
is
completely
different
to
what
it
was
when
you
were
designing.
The
building
so
I
think
there's
a
condition
on
materials
and
obviously
there'll
be
control
over
what
color
and
shade,
but
I
think
the
ability
to
specify
a
brick
now
would
be
quite
difficult
if
it
takes
them
another
year
to
get
Finance
Etc.
A
Thank
you.
Would
you
be
happy
for
us
when
it
when
it
is
decided
that
we
get
some
samples
of
these
bricks?
Would
that
be
possible
because
I
think
the
committee
are
Keen
now
and
from
sorry
from
other
applications?
We've
had
that
that
we
actually
want
to
see
the
brick
work,
the
color.
It
isn't!
Isn't
that
correct?
Yes,
because
we
have
had
some
mistakes
and
I
think
we're
very
keen
to
to
see
especially
something
like
this,
which
is
going
to
be
highly
visible.
Q
I
think
we
had
a
few
problems
over
the
last
two
years
with
samples
conditions,
because
there
was
no
way
to
deliver
a
sample
because
of
lockdown
but
I.
Think
now
that's
opened
up
again.
I
think
that's
a
easier
for
people
to
facilitate
now
or
we've
had
ones
where
bricks
have
been
on
on
site
and
people
have
been.
A
M
Just
put
your
mic
on
sorry,
thank
you!
So
I'm,
just
Curious
you
have
in
your
name
homes
limited.
Do
you
normally
build
homes
rather
than
flat
than
offices.
M
M
Yes,
they
would
normally
yes,
I
mean
it
seems
to
me
that
there
are
quite
a
few
vacant
offices
in
the
area
now,
because
some
of
the
banks
and
so
forth
have
have
left
the
buildings
and
they're
now
standing
empty,
so
I'm,
assuming
that
you
you
have
researched
this
and
that
there
will
be
sufficient
people
to
come
and
occupy
these
offices.
Q
I
think
a
big
problem
with
existing
commercial
floor
spaces.
It's
often
not
that
appropriate
for
the
type
of
uses
that
you
want
and
the
cost
of
converting
is
quite
expensive.
So
a
new
build
where
you
start
to
Fresh
can
be
quite
efficient
from
a
developer's
point
of
view.
You've
also
got
how
you
fun
Finance
your
portfolio.
So
if
you
want
to
build
six
Flats,
you
can
keep
them
as
rental
or
properties,
but
it's
subject
to
taxation
Etc.
Q
You
can't
keep
it
in
a
pension
fund.
So
if
you
want
to
grow
your
pension
fund,
you
cannot
build
out
flats
and
then
keep
it
in
your
pension
fund.
Whilst
you
can
do
an
office,
building,
you'll
still
get
good
returns
and
that's
something
you
can
keep
in
your
pension
fund
in
perpetuity.
So
there's
benefits
that
that
accrue.
That
way.
A
P
P
The
mention
of
the
train
station
just
across
the
road
from
there
is
a
good
plus
to
the
site
and
I
think
a
piece
of
land.
That's
currently
sort
of
low
value,
as
just
a
few
parking
spaces
can
now
be
used
to
benefit
and
improve
the
overall
appearance
of
the
site.
So
I'd
be
happy
to
make
a
proposal
on
that.
M
M
It's
it's
going
to
cause
a
lot
of
trouble
actually
for
people
turning
into
their
space
there,
and
maybe
we
need
to
look
a
bit
more
holistically
at
that
whole
area
in
the
same
way
that
we've
been
doing
with
Shoreham,
because
if
you
then
take
those
other
developments,
some
of
which
have
been
passed
and
others
haven't.
You
know,
let's
see
how
many
parking
spaces
we
are
actually
going
to
lose
all
told
and
then
I
think
it
might
be
a
different.
M
It
might
be
a
different
story
rather
than
taking
these
applications
piecemeal
and
saying
how
many
we
would
lose
on
this
site.
How
many
would
we
lose
all
together?
Because
when
there's
other
sites
are
developed,
there
will
be
further
loss
of
parking
space
and
so
I
think
we
do
need
to
look
at
it
in
the
round
really.
Thank.
A
I
That's
okay,
I
I,
afraid
I
must
sort
of
respectfully
disagree
with
councilor
panel
I
think
this
is
a
a
bland
development
that
could
could
be
anywhere
really
I
think
it
fails
to
really
celebrate
the
quite
unique
architecture
of
the
building
next
door,
like
we've,
seen
in
other
developments
like
the
ham
Road,
one
for
example,
which
I
think
complements
what
what
was
originally
there
quite
nicely
I
think
this
this
building
could
be
literally
anywhere
and
the
fact
that
it's
got
two
types
of
bricks
which
match
the
same
color
as
the
original
building
I
think
is,
is
is
not
really
taking
into
account
the
sort
of
beauty
of
the
original
building
and
trying
to
complement
it
in
some
way.
P
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
think
councilor
O'neill's
concerns
about
traffic
on
the
site,
it's
already
a
very
small
car
park,
so
the
amount
of
income
in
and
outgoing
traffic
is
not
going
to
drastically
be
improved,
and
although
the
road
is
very
busy
going
along
bright,
the
a259
because
of
the
traffic
lights
at
the
junction,
the
vehicles
do
tend
to
approach
they're
a
lot
slower,
so
I
feel
that
any
risk
of
cars
pulling
in
and
out
of
there
wouldn't
be
that
high
because
of
the
chance
of
the
traffic
lights
sort
of
calming
that
area.
P
J
Yes,
just
to
say,
I
I
live
very
close
to
here
as
well
about
200
yards
away
from
it.
I
I
do
agree
with
some
of
the
concerns
about
the
traffic,
but
the
same
time
it.
It
is
a
rundown
and
derelict
area,
as
councilor
funnel
was
saying,
I
think
it
could
be
an
improvement
to
the
era.
J
I
am
slightly
concerned
about
the
materials
as
I
asked
a
question
about
just
because
I
think
the
the
the
need
for
it
to
match
the
nature
of
the
town
hall
is
important
for
it
to
work,
but
but
I
have
to
say
overall
it's.
It
does
seem
to
me
to
be
a
an
improvement
to
the
area
that
that
is
run
down
the
the
property
next
door
that
we
understand
there's
an
application
coming
for
is
particularly
run
down.
J
So
there
is
the
potential
I
think
for
this
to
to
lift
the
areas.
Thank.
A
You,
cancer,
shin
and
I'll
just
come
back
on
the
materials
again
so
Gary.
Can
you
just
explain:
I
I
mean
I.
Think
the
whole
committee
would
like
to
see
the
materials
I
think
on
something
like
this.
It
is
actually
as
Council
shin
has
just
pointed
out,
vital
that
the
right
colors
are
are
chosen
for
this.
So
how
would
you
suggest
because
I
take
it?
You
would
like
to
put
that
forward.
J
Yes,
I
think
some
way
for
committee
to
see
the
bricks
before
a
decision
is
made
and
give
some
kind
of
sense
about
whether
that's
approved.
D
Well,
I'm
not
sure
we
can
hold
on
to
that
until
a
decision
is
made,
it'll
be
the
discharge
of
the
condition
when
it
comes
in
now.
Ordinarily,
on
on
matters
like
that,
it's
normally
through
the
chair
and
vice
chair
simply
because
I
don't
know
how
far
we
are
off
this
but
I.
Imagine
the
bricks
will
probably
come
in
at
some
time
in
the
future
when
we
won't
have
the
same
nine
committee
members
here.
So
it's
generally
done
for
the
chair
and
vice
chair.
D
If
everyone
was
the
same,
then
it's
quite
open
for
you
to
say:
let's
have
a
sample
left
in
the
members
room,
as
you
rightly
say,
but
I
think
in
terms
of
an
instruction
for
officers
which
may
be
some
months
away
in
its
actual
carrying
out
so
to
speak,
probably
easier
to
put
chair
and
vice
chairman
can
take
it
from
there.
P
D
Will
Sherry
be
a
bit
less
prescriptive
of
that
I?
Think
because
we've
got
a
car
parking
condition
on
that
requires
a
car
parking
spaces
to
be
provided.
Maybe
we
could
add
something
to
that
along
the
lines
of,
and
measures
to
prevent
parking
on.
The
pavement
shall
be
submitted
to
an
agreed
by
us
because
it
could
then
be
a
sign.
D
It
could
be
something
else,
I
think
just
to
sort
of
pigeonhole
the
developer
into
something
at
the
moment,
probably
a
bit
in
March,
but
if
we
put
that
by
condition
say
submit
something
to
us
for
us
to
consider.
That's
probably
the
easiest
way
of.
A
A
And
against
and
defer
or
refuse
abstain.
Okay,
so
you've
got
that
number
Studio.
Thank
you.
So
the
number
for
that
which
was
awdm
0123
22,
is
approved.
Thank
you
all
very
much,
and
so
we
go
on
to
the
last
one,
which
is
planning
appeals
which
there
are
none
this
evening
and
so
I
close
this
meeting
at
20
53..
Thank.