►
From YouTube: Worthing Planning Committee - 23 March 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
Please
note
that
this
meeting
is
being
live
streamed
and
a
link
to
a
recording
of
the
meeting
is
available
on
the
council's
website.
The
recording
will
begin
at
the
commencement
of
the
meeting
and
will
conclude
when
I've
declared
the
meeting
closed.
The
recording
of
this
meeting
will
be
available
to
view
for
one
year
and
will
be
deleted
after
that
period.
A
A
A
B
Thank
you
chairman.
There
is
no
fire
alarm
alarm
child
of
planned
during
the
meeting.
Therefore,
if
the
fire
alarm
sounds,
please
leave
via
the
nearest
exit
and
go
to
the
assembly
point
do
not
stop
to
collect
belongings.
The
assembly
point
is
at
the
front
of
the
museum
in
chapel
road.
Please
remain
at
the
assembly
point
until
advised
it
is
safe
to
return
to
the
building.
B
A
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
substitutes?
C
Yeah
sally
smith,
I'm
substituting
for
councillor
martin
mccabe,
please
thank.
A
Well,
give
her
a
kind
of
guards
good.
No
to
that
I
have
to
ask
if
there
are
any
declarations
of
interest.
A
No,
although
I
didn't
read
in
the
applications
any
connection
with
west
sussex
county
council
in
case
it
comes
up,
I
have
to
declare
that
I
am
a
member
of
west
sussex
county
council.
Thank
you
public
question
time.
A
D
Thank
you
chair.
I
I
did
send
you
a
note.
I
think,
yesterday
of
you
of
the
a
correction
I
wanted
to
make
to
the
minutes
of
at
all
possible
and
the
correction
I
mean
without
having
the
minutes
displayed
it's
hard
to
describe
it.
I
will
just
say
what
the
what
the
minutes
actually
contained
the
last
sentence
of
the
first
paragraph
in
the
application
concerning
the
colonnade
house
extension.
E
Yes,
thank
you.
I
wasn't
here
for
that
meetings.
I
wasn't
party
to
exactly
what
was
said,
but
it
sounds
like
it's
one
of
those
where
both
interpretations
are
correct
in
the
sense
that,
because
it's
an
application
with
a
fresh
reference
number,
it
is
a
new
application,
albeit
its
details
may
be
identical
to
what
was
previously
submitted.
E
If,
if
you
sort
of
see
my
my
meaning,
so
it
may
be,
a
rewording
is
needed
without
knowing
the
debate,
but
if
it's
a
new
application
with
a
fresh
reference
number,
that
is
a
new
application,
its
own
right,
but
if
the
details
of
in
it
are
exactly
the
same
as
what's
been
submitted
previously,
then
in
brackets
on
your
description,
which
I
think
is
what
happened
in
the
case
of
that
particular
application,
it
would
say
resubmission
of
previous
application
so
that
members
are
aware
that,
even
though
it
has
a
new
number,
the
details
are
the
same
as
previously.
E
D
D
So
I
I
my
contention
is
that
that
item
in
a
minute
should
be
deleted
as
it
wasn't
as
it
was
a
resubmission.
A
Yeah
it's
a
bit
complicated,
but
the
the
definition
is:
if
it's
a
new
number,
then
it
is
considered
a
a
new
application.
So
I
believe
the
minutes
are
correct.
Are
you
happy
to
accept
that.
D
No,
I'm
not
sure,
because
this
is
quite
an
important
matter.
There
are
other
issues
relating
to
this
application
which,
where
this
becomes
even
more
important
as
to
whether
it
was
a
resubmission
or
a
fresh
application.
D
A
In
that
case,
we
we
will
rework
the
minutes
for
that
particular
paragraph,
but
apart
apart
from
that,
we
agreed
that
the
minutes
are
correct.
Apart.
D
D
Sorry
jay,
I
had
just
one
other
one
other
element,
and
that
was
an
addition
in
another
part
of
the
minutes
of
that
particular
item
in
which
it
is
stated.
The
committee
posed
questions
the
head
of
planning
and
development
on
subjects,
including
viability,
the
sustainability
of
the
proposed
projects
and
concerns
over
heritage
issues,
and
I
wanted
to
have
included
in
their
reference
to
the
climate
emergency
issues,
which
were
also
questioned
as
part
of
that
session
of
questioning
mr
appleton
on
that
item,
I
think
that's
probably
not
controversial.
A
A
Yes,
john
turley,
councillor
and
steve
wells,
john
turley
proposed
steve
wills
seconded.
So
thank
you
very
much
eric
that
is
that
is
passed.
I
have
to
advise
you
that
there
are
no
items
raised
under
urgency
provisions.
A
A
Broadwater
road
worthing
and
the
proposal
is
to
upgrade
and
replacement
of
existing
15
meter
street
pole
style
telecommunications
mast
with
a
16
meter
street
pole,
style,
telecommunications
mast,
addition
of
one
ground-based
equipment
cabinet
and
it's
in
central
ward.
Mr
peck,
would
you
like
to
present
the
application.
E
Yes,
thank
you,
sir
item
one
on
your
agenda.
I've
received
one
further
letter
of
objection
on
the
grounds
of
health
masts
of
health
impacts
of
masts
near
schools.
I've
also
received
further
communication
from
the
applicants,
and
this
is
an
update
to
the
report
that
has
happened
since
it
was
written.
The
applicant
has
commented
that
legislation
amended
permitted
development
rights
comes
into
force
on
the
4th
of
april
and
from
then
proposal
would
not
require
planning
permission
and
that's
something
I'll
come
back
to
as
as
we
go
on
through
the
debate.
E
But
that
is
something
that's
happened
since
the
report
was
written.
Members
will
see
in
the
early
part
of
the
report.
It's
mentioned.
The
government
had
undertaken
a
consultation
on
extending
committed
development
rights
for
masters
of
this
type.
That
consultation
has
been
concluded
at
that
point,
when
the
report
was
written,
the
governments
were
saying
when
parliamentary
time
allows
and
somewhat
to
my
surprise,
quite
quickly-
they've
gone
straight
through
parliament
and
have
put
it
in
to
take
effect
from
the
fourth
of
april,
so
I'll,
but
I'll
come
back
to
that.
E
Possibly
after
speakers
have
spoken,
but
at
the
time
this
was
submitted,
plan
permission
is
or
was
required
and
the
the
site
is
shown
on
the
on
the
screen
at
the
moment,
circled
in
in
in
red,
where
the
cursor
is
at
the
moment,
as
we
just
show
a
plan
here
again,
so
the
application
site
is
there
where
the
cursor
is
and
there's
a
photograph
of
the
existing
poll
in
the
bottom
left-hand
corner
there,
which
I'll
come
back
to
in
in
a
moment.
E
This
is
the
existing
site
plan
with
the
poll
in
the
middle
and
there
are
some
equipment
cabinets
alongside.
So
that's
the
existing
situation,
and
then
we
can
see
just
as
per
that
photograph
a
moment
ago.
This
is
the
existing
elevation
with
the
15
meter
pole
and
just
in
terms
of
community
development
rights.
You
can
see
this
is
quite
a
thin
poll
and
that
will
govern
the
need
for
planning
permission
when
the
application
is
submitted.
So
that's
as
existing
and
then
the
proposal
is
in
red
here.
E
These
are
the
new
parts
to
the
south
of
the
existing
installation,
and
this
also
confirms
here
where
the
cursor
is.
The
existing
pole
is
removed
as
part
of
the
application,
so
that's
it
in
plan
form
and
then
in
elevation
form.
We
can
see.
Therefore,
the
existing
pole
to
be
removed
is
the
one
in
the
dotted
line
here.
E
This
is
the
new
pole
here
so
just
immediately
to
the
south.
The
equipment
cabinets
are
also
to
the
south
of
the
existing
pole.
Just
surrounding
that
and
would
be,
as
you
can
see,
no
higher
than
the
fence
that
surrounds
the
school
at
present
of
reference,
there
was
a
school
sign
there.
So
that's
the
the
new
structure
it
is.
It
is
thicker
bulkier
and
one
meter
above
the
existing.
E
A
D
Dean,
thank
you
very
much
j.
I
just
wanted
to
ask
we're
obviously
aware
of
the
application
that
had
been
made
for
the
well
front
of
the
shopping
parade
in
broad
water.
Is
this
a
substitute
for
that
that
mass
store?
Is
it
an
additional
one?
Sorry,
I
haven't
really
been
able
to
keep
up
with
what
happened
in
the
development
or
or
not
of
that
one.
E
The
areas
of
coverage
of
these
mars
is
quite
small,
but
as
it
happened,
when
the
preliminary
inquiry
came
in,
we
didn't
investigate
with
the
applicant
as
to
whether
there
are
alternative
sites
that
could
be
available
for
this
one
here
and
of
course,
they
looked
in
four
directions,
as
it
were
normally
be
the
case
and
immediately
pointed
out,
firstly,
that
to
the
north
will
be
outside
of
the
coverage
area,
and
secondly,
they
were
aware
that
the
council
had
resisted
the
previous
proposal
at
cricket's
parade
which,
as
members
will
know,
created
a
lot
of
objection
in
respect
to
that
one
and,
of
course,
part
of
their
rationale
for
not
going
to
north
was
well
you've
already
rejected
a
site
in
that
direction.
A
Thank
you,
council
dean.
You
had
a
supplementary.
D
Can
you
give
us
a
summary
of
the
issues
that
were,
if
you
like,
rejected
when
those
appeals
were
overturned.
E
Yes,
in
terms
of
the
ones
mentioned
in
the
in
in
the
report,
yes,
I
mean,
we've
lost
three
appeals
in
the
relative
recent
time
and
our
refusal
reasons,
or
rather
officers.
I
think,
there's
all
were
the
effect
on
the
street
scene
and
the
visual
impact
primarily
which
for
two
of
those
proposals,
certainly
there
are
only
prior
approvals,
which
is
all
we
can
take
into
account.
E
E
The
one
in
growing
road
is
already
up
and
I
have
to
concede,
doesn't
look
as
as
as
bad
as
I
thought
it
might
do
and
has
a
limited
impact
on
those
trees
around
it.
The
one
at
worthing
football
club,
the
inspector
sydney
came
along
and
said:
well,
we've
established
telecommunications
structures
here
on
the
stand
already.
E
So,
therefore,
that
there's
no
issue
with
with
with
that
one
slightly
surprised
me
is
the
one
by
eastwood
railway
station
and
similar
situations
this,
and
it
was
mast
a
bit
like
this
there
at
the
moment
on
the
on
the
slope
on
the
southern
side
of
the
railway
line.
As
you
come
to
the
bridge,
they
wanted
to
move
the
mast
further
up
the
slope
and
make
it
seven
meters
higher,
which
I
thought
was
out
of
the
question
to
be
honest
in
terms
of
street
scenes.
That
would
be
a
big
structure.
E
It's
over
20
metres
in
height
again
the
inspector
came
along
and
said
well,
more
or
less,
there's
no
better
place
for
it.
It
will
have
a
limited
impact
and
therefore
the
the
appeal
is
allowed
so
in
in
that
respect,
we
have
certainly
found
that,
in
terms
of
surrounding
impacts,
inspectors
are
more
looking
at
the
government
policy
of
encouraging
this
sort
of
infrastructure.
F
Yes,
just
wanted
to
ask
about
the
cabinets
there.
Actually,
as
I
was
walking
past
the
other
day,
I
counted
six
of
them
and
there'd
be
two
extra
cabinets.
I
believe
so
we'll
now
have
eight
or
will
somebody
go
in.
E
Yes,
it
is
a
good
question,
councillor
tully,
which
could
be
something
we
could
go
back
to
on
the
decision,
because
clearly
we
can
see
the
masses
being
removed,
but
these
cabinets
here
appear
to
remain
in
situ.
E
Some
of
these
again
or
the
majority
of
them
don't
require
plan
permission.
It
depends
on
their
floor
area
and
I
suspect
that
some
of
these
are
actually
primitive
development
as
well.
There
could
be
a
question
raised
as
to
whether
the
mass
is
going
do
these
ones
to
the
north
also
need
to
be
kept
because,
as
you
rightly
say,
we
have
one
two,
three
four
five
yeah
there'll
be
seven
or
eight
there
in
in
situ.
If
they're
all
retained.
A
G
E
Yes,
that
that
that
is
right.
Obviously
I'm
unconscious
about
speakers.
Here
we
have
a
planning
application
that
needs
to
be
determined
and
at
the
time
of
writing
the
report.
That
was
something
was
in
the
offing,
but
I
just
reread
what
what
came
out
last
week
and
the
government's
just
to
sort
of
give
you
the
wording
of
their
preamble
is
essential.
The
planning
system
supports
the
deployment
of
new
mobile
infrastructure.
E
That's
been
a
consistent
theme
of
government
movements
for
a
number
of
years,
and
it's
not
just
just
this
mass,
but
if,
as
you've
asked
a
question,
if
I
go
into
it
now,
as
we
have
the
existing
master
and
proposed
mast
on
there
under
the
previous
regime,
the
one
that
exists
as
of
today
as
of
the
23rd
of
march,
if
the
width
of
a
mast
is
more
than
a
third
greater
than
existing,
then
planning
permission
is
required
and
we
can
see
that
on
here.
E
That
is
the
case
and
therefore
permission
is
required
from
the
fourth
of
april.
They
can
go
to
two-thirds
without
planning
permission
and
permission
is
no
longer
required.
So,
unfortunately,
in
respect
to
the
timing
of
this
and
where
we
are,
it
does
appear
to
me
that,
after
the
fourth
of
april,
they
can
go
along
anyway
and
do
it
and
there
are
a
whole
raft
of
changes.
Members
may
not
be
aware
when
this
first
started,
the
height
limit
was
15
meters
without
planning
permission.
That
is
now
up
to
30..
E
Some
cases
need
prior
approval,
but
that
has
been
consistently
ramped
up
as
time
has
gone
along
and
so
in
effect,
the
the
controls,
if
you
like,
or
the
ability
to
determine
planning
applications
at
local
council
level,
diminishes
almost
of
each
passing
couple
of
years,
and
as
I
say
when
I
wrote
this
report,
the
phrase
at
that
time
was
when
parliamentary
time
allows,
which
I
took
to
mean.
E
Well,
that's
often
a
few
weeks
on
well,
it
can
be
a
few
months
on
sometimes,
and
then
I
I
read
in
our
weekly
updates
and
indeed
read
it
for
myself
a
couple
days
ago
that
it's
actually
been
laid
before
parliament
comes
in
on
the
fourth
of
fourth
of
april.
A
A
Thank
you
and
when
you,
when
you're
ready
to
speak,
you'll,
be
timed
for
three
minutes
and
you
can
just
start
by
pressing
the
green
button
on
the
microphone
and
start
speaking.
H
H
H
The
ignerc
certificate
is
a
self-certification
only.
It
just
shows
conformance
to
a
standard.
It's
based
on
thermal
effects
on
a
model
of
a
soldier's
head.
There
has
been
no
independent
verification
here
that
the
standard
will
be
met,
that
it
will
be
safe
for
children
or
wildlife,
or
that
the
influence
of
other
masts
in
the
area
will
raise
the
level
of
radiation
above
the
guidelines.
H
H
The
environmental
health
section
is
the
consulti,
and
this
is
the
section
who
should
have
the
technical
knowledge
to
make
a
sound
judgment
as
to
whether
these
mast
applications
are
safe.
I
am
a
qualified
environmental
health
officer
who
used
to
work
for
the
council,
and
I
can
tell
you
there
is
no
training
in
wireless
radiation
for
these
officers.
The
lady
who
responded
on
behalf
of
environmental
health
used
to
be
in
my
team,
and
I
can
confirm-
has
no
such
training.
H
So
where
there
is
a
conflict,
the
health
considerations
must
come
first
and
the
nppf
is
guidance,
not
law.
There's
a
conflict
with
sustainability,
because
5g
is
a
huge
energy
hog
and
finally,
does
the
council's
insurance
policy
cover
harm
from
wireless
radiation
from
phone
masks
that
they
have
approved.
If.
A
A
A
I
I've
been
a
child
minder
in
worthing
for
almost
30
years,
and
I
live
and
work
close
to
the
mast.
I
have
two
sons
of
my
own
and
21
children
who
come
to
me
for
care.
Each
week
there
are
currently
five
children
at
beau
hunt
who
I've
cared
for
from
their
early
years.
A
huge
part
of
my
work
is
safeguarding.
I
This
type
of
radiation
threatens
health
and
safety
of
us
all,
but
particularly
our
children.
They
absorb
much
much
more
radiation
than
adults,
because
their
organs
and
tissues
are
more
absorbent
and
their
skulls
are
thinner.
I've
brought
studies
which
I've
left
over
there.
Local
councils
have
a
duty
of
care
to
all
constituents.
We
must
examine
the
potentially
serious
harm
posed
by
this
new
technology.
I
To
ignore
this
would
be
neglectful
at
best
and
potentially
criminal
at
worst,
especially
where
there
are
financial
incentives
involved.
I'd
like
to
draw
your
attention
to
a
most
amassed
proposed
next
to
fishersgate
primary
school
in
may
of
2021
cost
of
13
000
pounds
were
awarded
against
brighton
hove
council
in
november
2021,
because
the
council
failed
to
address
the
health
impacts
of
the
proposal
and
to
obtain
adequate
evidence
of
the
proximity
of
the
mars
to
the
school.
Other
applications
for
5g
marks
show
a
minimum
of
50
meters
exclusion
zone
around
the
mast.
I
I
I
have
also
brought
further
evidence
that
radio
frequency
radiation
affects
cognitive
function
in
adolescence,
spatial
working
memory,
fine
and
gross
motor
skills
and
attention.
This
is
not
conducive
to
learning.
Exposure
to
these
types
of
radiation
is
also
cumulative.
So
if
a
child
is
exposed
all
day
in
the
classroom
and
then
goes
home
to
another
strongly
exposed
environment,
the
effects
will
be
even
greater.
Non-Ionising
radiation
of
this
type
has
also
been
proven
to
cause
cancer
contribute
to
fertility
issues,
hormonal
disruption,
headaches,
adhd,
oxidative
stress
and
many
other
negative
conditions.
Again.
I
I
5G
is
also
vulnerable
to
cyber
attack,
because
it's
entirely
managed
by
software
leaving
the
system
open
to
hacking
an
increasingly
serious
risk
in
the
current
climate.
Please,
google
cyberpolygon
for
more
information.
The
radiation
frequency
can
be
easily
varied
for
different
uses,
so
the
result
of
hacking
may
not
be
just
a
case
of
losing
phone
signals.
I
Some
frequencies
can
be
extremely
dangerous
to
human
animal
and
plant
life,
depriving
the
cell
of
oxygen
did
you
know
that
this
technology
was
developed
from
microwave
weaponry
and
has
recently
been
used
in
war
situations
and
in
crowd,
control,
causing
burn,
sickness
and
serious
side
effects.
The
potential
for
misuse
is
real.
I
would
like
to
see
5g
infrastructure
put
on
hold,
at
least
while
the
current
climate
of
international
threat
and
conflict
continues,
and
especially
regarding
proposals
that
are
close
to
residential
areas
and
schools.
I
myself
am
sensitive
to
these
types
of
radiation.
I
I
A
Thank
you
very
much.
If
you'd
like
to
remain
in
your
seat
members,
do
you
have
any
questions
for
the
speaker?
A
No,
no,
okay!
You
may
return
to
your
seat.
Thank
you
very
much
man,
mr
peck.
Is
there
anything
you
want
to
say.
A
Okay,
in
that,
in
that
case,
we
will
we'll
go
into
debate.
Who
would
like
to
start
the
debate.
D
Thank
you
chair.
It's
it's
actually
just
really.
I
think
we
do
need
some
guidance
if
mr
peck
can
give
it
to
us
because
clearly,
if,
if
we
either
have
responsibility
to
take
into
account
potential
health
risks
or
we
don't-
and
it
appears
from
what
is
said
here
in
a
rather
I
would
say-
heavy-handed
directive
from
government,
local
local
planning
authorities
must
determine
applications
on
planning
grounds
only.
D
So
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
because
clearly,
there
is
no
point
in
making
arguments
in
relation
to
health.
If
we,
if
they
can't
be,
they
aren't
matters
of
our
responsibility.
E
Yeah,
I
think
that
there
are
probably
two
strands
to
this
as
as
to
how
the
council
operates
as
a
whole
and
how
a
planning
committee
can
operate,
which
I
think
in
in
some
respects,
when
the
first
speaker
spoke
and
said.
Who
is
the
competent
person?
I
thought
it
won't
be
in
this
committee
or
a
planning
officer
and
then
mention
the
environmental
health
section.
Now
that's
a
a
separate
matter
from
here,
because
my
role
for
this
planning
committee
is
to
guide
you
on
what
you
can
take
and
can't
take
into
account.
E
So
certainly
from
a
personal
point
of
view,
I
can
look
at
the
planning
aspects,
so
I
I
have
dealt
with
mass
applications
for
many
years
and
recognized
the
community
concern
about
these
that
have
been
expressed
for
for
decades.
Long
before
5g
came
along,
but
in
terms
of
the
planning
committee
and
what
the
planning
decision
can
take
into
account.
E
Then
I
think,
as
councillor
dean
says,
whether
it's
heavy-handed
or
quite
direct
in
its
instruction.
It
is
there
and
you
can
see
it
in
terms
of
one
of
the
appeal
decisions
where
the
inspector
gave
it
literally
a
sentence.
E
I
think,
as
I
quoted
my
report
and
said
well,
if
you
have
the
documentation
submitted
in
terms
of
the
internet
certificate,
then
it's
not
a
consideration
for
for
a
council,
and
that
is
only
the
case
is
where
an
application
is
required
in
the
first
place,
which
is
a
further
difficulty
which
I
think
is
going
to
be
more
difficult
for
us
as
as
we
go
along
in
in
coming
months.
E
So
in
terms
of
what
a
planning
department
can
do,
it's
my
view
that
there
isn't
anywhere
to
go
on
on
that,
whether
as
a
council,
there
is
further
guidance
by
or
whether
the
council
needs
to
look
at.
E
Simplistically
heavy-handed,
if
you
say
that
that's
the
case
believe
in
allowing
for
that,
and
it's
the
background
I
explained
to
council
of
wills
a
moment
ago-
is
the
government
are
continually
taking
this
away
from
the
planning
departments
in
any
case,
and
we
are
literally
10
days
or
whatever.
It
is
away
from
the
point
where
this
planning
application
would
no
longer
be
part
of
it.
It
doesn't
even
need
a
prior
approval,
so
it
just
goes
on
there
without
us
being
involved
at
all.
E
E
It's
virtually
nothing.
I
think
the
only
thing
we
might
be
able
to
gain
out
of
this,
where
it's
a
planning
application,
and
it's
only
a
mite,
but
at
the
moment
we
have
a
plan
application
that
says
here
that
one's
been
removed
when
this
one's
been
imposed
instead
put
in
place
and
still
directed
and
there's
a
condition
on
saying
that
first
one
will
be
removed.
Now,
if
they
follow
that,
then
we
might
want
to
get
the
first
one
down.
E
As
far
as
I
can
see,
if,
under
the
new
community
development
machine,
they
come
along
in
a
couple
of
months
time,
and
so
we're
just
going
to
put
it
up-
and
we
say
what's
happening
to
the
old
one,
where
it's
not
a
question
we
can
ask,
so
we
may
be
in
a
more
difficult
position
of
end
up
with
two
there,
so
we
are
between
a
rock
and
a
half
place
on
on
on
this.
As
far
as
I
can
see,
I
I,
as
I
say
I
receive
many
communications
about
these.
E
They
become
more
heightened
when
they're
near
a
sensitive
receptor,
which
I
quite
understand
our
difficulty
is
more,
and
I
appreciate
the
point
about
which
came
first,
which
was
the
boss.
Was
there
before
beau
hunt
and
circumstances
have
changed
since
then,
but
we
have
no
ability
to
get
rid
of
that.
So
it's
still
going
to
be
there.
Whatever
happens
with
with
planning
application.
That's
our
difficulty,
there's
no
scope
in
the
planning
system
to
say,
because
it's
5g
we
can
deal
with
it
differently,
there's
nothing
there
at
all.
E
In
that
respect,
so
you
know
I
all
I
can
say
is
that
you
know
I
hear
these
concerns
but
like
with
any
plan
application,
I
can
only
advise
you
on
what
we're
entitled
to
take
into
account
and
I
think
if
we
refuse
this
well,
firstly,
it
could
be
erected
under
the
community
development
anyway,
but
secondly,
I
have
to
say
I
doubt
we
get
much
more
on
the
line
that
we
got
last
time
when
we,
when
we
raised
the
case
at
one
of
the
other
sites.
G
So
if
we
reject
this
tonight,
then
they
can
come
along
and
put
the
master
and
there's
not
a
lot.
We
can
do
if
they
come
along.
If
we
reject
it
and
they
appeal
it,
they've
won
all
of
please.
Let
me
finish:
they
won
the
other
appeals
and
it's
very
likely
they
will
win
this
one.
So
I'm
afraid
it's
with
a
very
heavy
heart
that
I
may
have
to
agree
that
this
goes
through.
G
D
Thank
you
chair.
I
didn't
really
make
any
comment.
I
just
asked
for
this
clarification
and
thank
mr
pickford
peckfor
that
for
that
clarification,
as
everyone
here
knows,
I'm
not
a
fan
of
the
extension
of
permitted
development,
as
has
been
the
one
to
this
government
across
a
whole
raft
of
areas.
It
does
diminish
the
the.
What
we
can
do
within
planning
committee
diminishes
what
planners
can
do
in
making
and
responding
to
what
our
residents
want.
D
D
We
shouldn't
comment
on:
it's
not
not
in
our
let's
to
comment
on
it.
However,
I
I
would
say
that
the
fact
that
it's
here
has
given
you
the
opportunity
to
raise
those
issues,
and
hopefully
that
will
be
picked
up
elsewhere,
and
I
do
thank
you
for
coming
along
and
and
letting
us
hear
your
views.
But
regrettably,
I
think
our
hands
are
tied
firmly
behind
our
back
on
this
one.
A
The
recommendation
is
to
approve,
subject
to
the
four
conditions
that
are
detailed.
Yes,
councillor,
gene
sorry.
D
E
G
A
A
Right,
I
think
that
is
unanimous.
Thank
you
very
much
right,
so
that
application
is
is
approved.
Thank
you
very
much
and
gallery
if,
if
you
want
you're
welcome
to
stay
for
the
whole
meeting,
but
if
you
want
to
leave
now
you'd
be
very
welcome.
A
So
we
go
on
to
the
next
application,
which
is
application,
number
awdm,
stroke,
231,
stroke,
21
and
the
recommendation
is
also
to
approve
the
site.
Is
the
assembly
hall
and
richmond
road
stoke
abbott
road,
worthing
west
sussex?
The
proposal
is
listed,
building
consent
for
installation
of
a
solar
photovoltaic
system
on
the
roof
and
the
application
is
the
applicant
is
wording
barrier
council
and
the
ward
is
central.
E
Yes,
thank
you
chair
item
two,
nothing
further
to
to
add
to
the
report
by
way
of
representation
and
just
to
confirm
the
recommendation
is
to
grant
this
to
building
consent.
That
line
was
missed
out.
Underneath
the
word
recommendation
on
the
towards
the
end
of
the
report
I
say
approved
at
the
top,
but
there
was
a
line
missing
there.
So
it's
the
grant
listed
building
consent.
E
E
Now
this
photograph
here
just
shows
a
couple
of
views
of
of
the
visibility,
firstly
from
slow
cabinet
road,
just
saying
you
can't
see
the
roof
from
there
and
also
from
the
civic
center
car
park
at
ground
level,
which
it's
probably
a
bit
of
a
kind
of
view
that
was
submitted
with
the
application.
E
But
in
terms
of
our
own
photographs,
probably
slightly
more
relevant
moving
around
here
again
so
on
the
road
there,
but
you
can't
see
the
existing
roof
light,
so
the
panels
will
be
in
there,
so
they
wouldn't
be
visible
from
that
point,
and
really
this
is
about
the
best
view
you
can
get
so
further
into
the
into
the
old
car
park
than
that
previous
picture
was
taken.
E
We
can
see
here
again
because
the
way
the
roof
comes
down,
they're
going
to
be
in
this
gap
here-
and
this
is
the
more
visible
elevation
and
therefore
will
not
be
seen
from
from
outside
of
the
application
site
to
any
any
degree.
Members
will
notice
that
the
conservation
architecture
supported
the
application
that
basis.
E
So,
therefore,
as
there
is
no
adverse
impact
upon
the
listed
building
the
recommendations
to
grant
permission,
thank
you.
A
No,
no
members.
Okay,
in
that,
in
that
case,
I
will
say
that
the
the
debate
is
now
closed
and
we'll
go
to
the
vote.
Could
I
have
a
proposal?
A
Thank
you
very
much,
councillor
cox
hill,
and
I
think
it
was
councillor
turley
before
karen
harman,
all
those
in
favor.
Please
show
thank
you
very
much.
That
is
unanimous
that
application
is
passed
and
we
have
to
now
go
to
item
seven,
and
I
have
to
advise
that
gary
peck
would
like
to
take
this
opportunity
to
provide
members
with
a
verbal
update
on
the
chat,
small
farm
appeal
outcome.
Okay,.
E
Yes,
thank
you
chair,
I'm
sure,
as
members
will
be
aware,
the
appeal
the
outline
appeal
for
the
475
dwellings
was
allowed
on
appeal
back
end
of
start
this
month,
so
that
should
have
appeared
in
the
appeals
list,
which
I
apologize
for
that,
but
just
to
to
update
members.
Clearly
officers
and
I'm
sure,
members
and
certainly
local
residents
are
all
extremely
disappointed.
With
this
decision,
we've
been
looking
at
it
very
carefully
over
the
last
few
weeks
because
there
is
a
six-week
challenge
period
by
way
of
judicial
review.
E
E
Personally
I
find
extremely
surprising
and
so
just
to
to
advise
members
that
this
week,
further
consultation
has
been
taking
place
between
officers
and
our
barrister
as
to
whether
there
are
grounds
for
a
jr
review.
We
still
have,
I
think,
three
weeks
to
submit
that,
but
those
considerations
or
discussions
are
active
council
jenkins
as
leader
and
councillor
mrs
wakes
as
cabinet
member
are
being
kept
informed,
but
it
is
to
advise
members
that
we
are
very
actively
looking
at
whether
we
have
grounds
to
challenge
the
decision
at
present.
A
Thank
you
gary.
Do
any
members
want
to
ask
a
question
on
that
one
for
clarification,
no
fine,
so
I
have
to
advise
that
we've
come
to
the
end
of
the
meeting
tonight.
The
time
is
1916.