►
From YouTube: Planning and Regulatory Services Committee on Wednesday the 2nd of March 2022 at 3.00pm
Description
Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council Planning and Regulatory Services Committee on Wednesday the 2nd of March 2022 at 3.00pm in the Council Chamber at Craigavon Civic and Conference Centre
D
To
turn
on
the
live
feed,
let
me
know
when
it's
on
okay,
I'm
out
of
turnover
good
afternoon,
you're,
all
very
welcome
to
the
march
plan
regulatory
services
committee
we'll
just
get
straight
into
it
item.
One
apologies
of
apology
from
councillor
tillman
who's
getting
married
tomorrow,
and
I
will
congratulate
them
on
that.
I
also
apologize
from
councillor
macklin
and
the
director
olga
marta.
D
A
Thank
you,
chair
and
good
afternoon
members
sony
has
published
their
draft
transmission
development
plan
for
the
period
2021
to
20
30,
which
is
open
to
public
consultation
from
the
18th
of
january
to
the
15th
of
march,
a
copy
of
the
draft
transmission
development
plan
can
be
found
on
appendix
1..
It
outlines
projects
that
are
needed
over
the
next
10
years
in
order
to
make
the
operational
needs
of
the
transmission
network,
support
the
local
economy
and
deliver
decarbonisation.
A
Members
may
be
aware
that
this
plan
is
produced
annually.
Following
feedback
received
from
this
public
consultation.
They
propose
to
update
the
draft
plan
as
required
and
provide
a
report
to
the
utility
regulator
for
approval.
A
further
public
consultation
of
the
draft
transmission
development
plan
will
be
held
by
the
utility
regulator
before
it
is
finalized.
A
Members
should
note
that
there
will
be
a
further
opportunity
later
this
year
to
engage
on
this
matter
when
the
utility
regulator
publishes
the
draft
plan
for
public
consultation.
The
draft
response
at
appendix
2
welcomes
the
consultation
and
stresses
the
importance
of
affordable,
reliable
energy
supply
within
the
council
area,
along
with
ongoing
engagement
between
council
and
sonai.
It
also
indicates
that
the
response
is
draft
as
it
is
going
through
council's
approval
and
ratification
process.
A
E
Yep,
thank
you
sure
thank
you
helen
for
the
presentation
and
I
suppose,
in
relation
to
their
play,
no
issue
with
with
the
reply
chair.
However,
I
would
remind
committee
that,
obviously,
sony
came
into
council
prior
to
european
council
chairman
and
the
council
voted
unanimously
that
night,
that
that
this
interconnector
should
be
underground
and
not
overgrown,
which
is
still
proposed
by
obviously
sony
with
pylons,
etc,
and
obviously
the
health
risk
that
comes
with
with
that
is
is
a
concern,
as
well
as
the
aesthetic
and
look
of
our
our
countryside.
E
So
it's
something
that
I
don't
know
whether
chairman,
whether
we
want
to
add
that
on
to
you,
know
the
letter
and
because
it
was
discussed
at
full
council,
it
was
voted
on
and
it
was
carried
that
we
did
not.
We
supported
the
principle
of
the
interconnected,
exact
words,
the
principle
of
the
interconnector
and,
however
we
were.
We
were
basically
saying
adamant
that
it
had
to
be
underground
and
definitely
there's
a
need,
for.
We
all
know
energy
costs
where
they're
going
at
the
minute,
german
and
and
basically
and
there's
a
need
for
additional
network
capacity.
E
D
F
Thank
you,
sir
honor.
What's
honestly
important
that
counselor
nicholson
ray
is
that
the
council
does
have
a
position
on
the
north
side
and
the
connector
would
be
supportive,
but
we
would
like
it
underground,
rather
than
pale
unstated
across
the
country
shape,
so
chrysler
nicholson's
proposed
that
I
would
hardly
send
it
that
we
ought
to
line
to
our
responses,
reiterating
our
position
on
the
north
side
and
the
connector
chair.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
country,
savage
because
that's
been
proposed
in
secondland
and
the
other
lights
on
not
seeing
any
members
so
well,
so
that
to
that
proposal,
when
cancer
nixon
includes
approving
the
recommendations
subject
to
that
small
amendment,
okay
well
agreed
members
on
that.
Okay,
all
agreed,
and
thank
you
helen.
G
G
G
G
G
The
auto
office
proceeds
to
make
a
series
of
recommendations
based
on
its
findings
and
those
recommendations
include
improving
performance
on
key
investment
applications,
reviewing
planning
fees
and
reviewing
planning
committee
matters.
For
example,
recording
reasons
for
referring
applications
to
committee,
recording
reasons
for
overturning
an
officer
recommendation
and
identifying
who
has
prompted
a
call
into
committee.
G
G
We
are
already
piloting
new
validation
arrangements
and
promoting
front
loading
to
improve
the
quality
of
applications
and
we're
already
also
implementing
many
of
the
recommended
actions
for
planning
committee.
So
many
of
the
things
that
have
been
recommended
by
the
report
we're
already
doing
numbers,
and
hopefully
that
gives
you
a
an
overview
of
what
is
in
the
report
and
on
the
way
ahead,
numbers
but
happy
to
take
any
queries
or
questions
chart.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you,
chair
and
damian.
Thanks
for
that
report
and,
broadly
you
know,
identity
too
badly
out
of
it.
You
know,
from
the
other
point
of
view,
this
the
point
it
jumped
out
of
a
demon
was
the
system
in
is
inefficient
and
offered
often
hampered
by
poor
quality
applications,
and
that's
been
sort
of
a
bug
bar
that
the
founders
staff
have
had
for
a
long
time.
You
know
it's
near
like
an
mlp
role,
you're
telling
them
that's,
what's
wrong
with
it
and
then
they're
going
away
and
fixing
it
you
know.
F
G
Thanks
through
the
chair
yeah,
absolutely
it
would
and
look
what
what
they're
suggesting
here
is.
I
think,
if
I
have
agreed
to
it,
you'll
see
in
one
of
the
further
reports
coming
before
you
today
around
the
review
of
the
planner
act
is
that
they
will
look
at
through
legislation
bringing
in
a
second
holidays
and
checklist
which
really
is
about
raising
the
bar
for
making
the
planner
application
valid.
In
other
words,
it's
more
difficult
to
get
it
into
the
system
and
we're
already
piloting
that
in-house
we're
doing
that
with
our
majors
team.
G
It's
been
working
really
well,
and
I
know
there's
only
one
other
council
that
I'm
aware
of
it's
doing
at
the
moment
just
belfast,
but
we
have
done
it
through
our
majors
team
and-
and
hopefully
this
legislation
coming
in
will
enable
it
to
be
applied
more
widely,
and
what
it
means
is
that
when
we
get
an
application
under
the
system,
it
should
be
ready
to
go.
G
We
shouldn't
have
to
carry
out
a
name
with
each
other,
so
certainly
the
change
in
legislation
would
address
that,
but
also
suppose,
some
progress
as
well
around
front
loading
applications
and
so
working
with
applicants
before
they
put
it
in
to
make
sure
that
everything
is
there
that
we
require
again.
We've
done
that
a
lot
more
major
applications
and
we
tried
it
we're
trying
to
roll
it
out
more
widely
across
all
applications
as
well.
We're
working
on
we're
doing
some
work
behind
the
scenes
on
that,
and
so
together.
D
Thank
you,
damian
country,
savage
councillor,
nicholson.
E
Yep,
thank
you
churn
thanks
damian
and,
I
suppose,
like
a
country,
savage
said,
we
suppose
don't
want
to
lose
our
heads
here
that
this
is
all
the
planning
system,
a
of
all
11
councils,
I'm
assuming
chairman.
So
so,
therefore,
as
as
damian,
as
rightly
pointed
out,
we're
actually
probably
one
of
the
the
better
ones.
If
in
in
the
context
and
there's
there's
a
lot
of
things
there
that
I
I
can
totally
see
where
damian's
coming
from
that
we
already
we've
already
implemented
ourselves,
we
didn't
need
to
be
told.
E
You
know,
we've
been
very
proactive
to
try
and
sort
of
improve
the
the
the
the
plan
and
system
because
of
what
we're
sort
of
hearing
from
the
you
know,
folk
on
the
ground
and
and
whatever
and
totally
agree
with
what
what
what
is
said
is
concerned
that
we're
still
talking
about
poor
quality
applications,
and
I
know
if
that's
still
reflective
in
abc
or
that's
just
other
councils.
I
don't
know,
there's
one
thing
that
struck
out
to
me
there
and
and
again
a
demon
to
to
expand
on
it.
E
Is
that
then
there
was
there
was
something
about.
Oh
yeah
leadership
of
the
planning
system
like
how
would
you
read
that
game
and
I'm
not
pointing
at
you
as
as
the
head
of
planning,
but
you
know
for
for
them
to
sort
of
come
up
with
something
like
that
did
any.
I
you
know
did
expand
on
these
things
to
say
what
what
does
that
mean,
and
I
suppose
the
other
thing
damien
is
that
that
I
find
having
by
using
our
system
and
as
an
agent
and
seeing
it
like
we're
very
we're
very
reactive,
proactive.
E
You
know,
I
I
use
other
planning
systems
and
there's
there's
you
can
click
on
that
site
and
it
tells
you
exactly
what
you
need
before
you
launch
that
planning
application
from
it
roads
from
environmental
from
you
know
historic
from
drainage,
whatever
it
gives.
You
almost
like
a
a
starting
point,
and
I
think
maybe
that's
something
that
we
could
maybe
look
at.
E
You
know
in
relation
that,
but
I
think
all
in
all
damian,
I
think
you
know
we're
going
the
right
direction
and
and
again
I
suppose
husband
said
you
and
your
staff
are-
are
the
reason
we're
we're
we're
we're
doing
that.
So.
But
if
you
just
address
those
couple
of
things,
damon
and
sort
of
what
your,
what
your
thoughts
that
means
and
and
we'll
we'll
leave
it
there
thanks
sure.
G
G
You
know
in
this
report
on
and
the
reference
to
providing
leadership
and
support
is
directed
very
firmly
at
dfi
as
a
regional
planning
authority,
and
I
think
the
point
that's
being
made
is
that,
in
the
view
of
miao
there's
a
silo
mentality
across
the
planning
system
in
northern
ireland
at
the
moment
and
because
you've
different
organizations
involved,
you've
got
councils,
you
could
dfi,
you've
got
consultaes
and,
according
to
the
report,
each
organization
is
prioritizing
its
own
resources,
its
own
responsibilities,
its
own
budgets,
we're
not
all
going
at
it
in
the
same
direction.
G
G
In
relation
to
to
the
point
about,
you
know:
providing
direction
to
applicants
and
agents
about
what
information
is
needed
in
relation
to
an
application
yeah.
That
is
what
that
you
know
raising
the
bar
will
do
it
will
bring
in
legislation.
That
says,
look
you
know
without
you
providing
whatever
report.
It
is,
for
example,
flood
risk
assessment.
G
G
Actually,
when
there's
no
legal
mandate
to
comply
with
it,
they're
actually
welcoming
and
saying
you
know:
okay,
we'll
go
away,
we'll
do
more
work,
we'll
put
the
application
back
in
whenever
we've
provided
all
the
information
you're
telling
us
we
need,
and
so
that
has
paid
dividends
for
us,
and
you
can
see
that
through
the
audit
report
in
terms
of
how
well
we've
done
in
processing
major
applications
in
comparison,
all
their
counselors
and
but
that
does
need
to
be
ruled
out
more
widely.
So
it
does
need
to
be
sort
of
supplied
to
every
application.
G
So
hopefully,
that
addresses
the
issues.
Sure
thanks.
E
Yeah,
absolutely
thanks
steven
for
you
for
your
place
and
I
suppose
in
doing
what
you're
doing
it
actually
helps
the
agents
because
clients
very,
very
all
majority
time.
Trying
to
just
said.
Do
I
need
that
report
and
if
it's
coming
from
you
at
the
start,
yes,
you
do
need
this
report.
Like
I
recall
a
plan
on
committee,
there
was
a
debate
whether
we
needed
a
flood
risk
assessment
or
not.
I'm
sure
you
know
what
I'm
talking
about
and
and,
as
I
say,
clients
keep
spending
more
money
and
have
to
so.
E
You
can't
blame
them
at
the
end
of
the
day
and
and
they're
the
ones,
but
if
it's
in
black
and
white
at
the
start,
this
is
what
you
need:
a
b
c
d
e
whatever
and
there's
no
and
there's
no,
you
know
sort
of
you
know
waving
away
from
that
and
I
think
it
would
make
the
system
a
lot
more
streamlined
and
it
would
it
would
make
it
easier
for
agents
as
well,
because
I
do.
E
I
do
think
that
you
know
and
again
reading
the
report
and,
I
suppose,
come
up
from
an
agent
determine
agent.
But
you
know
these
poorly
put
together.
Applications
that
could
be
based
on
ages
not
be
able
to
get
these
reports
done
and
said
sure
we'll
put
it
in
there
and
then
we'll
see
that.
But
thanks
damian
appreciate
that.
H
Having
said
that,
the
issue
that
I
would
want
to
raise-
I
know
it
has
been
touched
on
slightly
in
terms
of
your
reply
to
kind
of
slur
nicholson
and
that's
regarding
the
statutory
council
tease
and
how
they
are
struggling
to
to
provide
the
information
in
time
the
manner
and
well,
I'm
I'm
not
sure
that
it
happens
here
every
month,
but
certainly
it
happens
numerous
months
that
there
are
that
there
are
issues
around
that,
and
I'm
just
wondering
you
know,
what's
your
sense,
damien
in
terms
of
from
the
center
of
from
the
department.
H
G
Yeah
that
through
the
chair
thanks
comes
from
mcclelland
yeah.
I
think
the
the
resourcing
of
consulting
is
obviously
an
issue.
G
The
legislation
sets
down,
and
so
the
resourcing
is
one
aspect
of
that.
But
it
is
a
call
for
you
know
to
say
it's
a
call
for
those
departments
to
ensure
that
they
have
the
the
funding
to
resource
their
own
departments.
But,
aside
from
that
issue,
I
think
you
know
the
legislation,
and
one
of
the
points
has
been
picked
up
is
that
there
should
be
legislation.
I
think
this
has
come
out
of
the
report.
G
That's
coming
up
later
around
the
review
of
the
planning
act
that
the
department
is
prepared
to
look
at,
for
example,
imposing
financial
penalties
in
consul,
not
financial
politics,
but
penalties
on
consultation,
don't
respond
within
time
and
also
they
have
agreed
to
look
at
providing
clarification
to
councils
and
what
we
can
do.
If
consultees
don't
comment
in
time,
because
there
is
a
bit
of
uncertainty
at
the
moment
about,
do
you
proceed
to
determine
the
application
without
their
response?
Does
that
leave
us
open
potentially
to
the
judicial
review?
G
Further
down
the
line,
and-
and
I
know
we've
been
looking
at
that
matter
very
very
carefully,
but
it
would
help
enormously
if
we
had
in
legislation
a
clear
direction
to
councils
as
to
where
we
can
go
and
in
no
circumstances.
I
Thank
you,
german,
on
thanks
to
the
imminent,
no
just
touching
on
that
on
the
same
subject.
It's
something
we
have
raised
a
number
of
times
about
consultation,
not
been
able
to
get
the
information.
I
Then,
when
you
touched
on
there
doesn't
mean
maybe
going
outside
with
something
not
in
legislation
and
go
ahead
on
the
tournament
application
where
we
would
stand
in
that
or
the
other
side
of
it
would
be.
Do
we
refuse
and
send
it
back,
because
we
haven't
got
that
particular
response
and
believe
me
just
to
if
all
the
checklists
are
not
ticked
on
the
on
an
application
that
is
sandbag.
But
what
does
that
mean?
I
I
I
don't
think
I
don't
think
the
people
or
the
the
one
whose
applications
go
on
for
should
be
in
some
way
have
to
pay
that
there's
only
thoughts,
not
that
if
something
like
that
is
handed
back
or
refused
that
it
would
be
can
be
resubmitted
at
a
less
cost
or
no
cost.
But
it's
just
something
I
was
thinking
of,
but
at
least
what
we're
seeing
here.
I
We
did
make
a
good
effort
here
and
I
do
know
through
the
majors
that
you've
talked
about
that
your
department
is,
is
doing
very
well,
that's
much
appreciated,
and
I
think
it's
good
and
with
with
that
down
the
market
from
other
countries
followed
by
getting
on
with
it
in
a
number
of
ways.
So
just
a
couple
of
points,
so
thank
you.
G
Yeah
thanks
sure
yeah
thanks
so
long
anderson
and
yeah
they're
good.
They
when
we
do
receive
an
application
which
doesn't
it
isn't
accompanied
by
all
the
information
that
we
require,
and
we
will
seek
to
try
and
get
that
information
from
the
applicant
by
giving
them
a
reasonable
period
of
time
to
do
that.
But
we
have
to
be
very
worried
that
that
doesn't
mean
we
miss
our
targets,
neither
can
be
unnecessary
delays
and
that
that
can't
put
us
in
a
difficult
position.
G
So
what
we
will
endeavor
to
do
if
possible,
if
we
don't
have
all
the
we
can
refuse
it
and
we
will.
We
are
prepared
to
refuse
it,
but
it
does
mean
that
an
applicant
then
has
to
come
back
and
pay
a
fee,
the
next
time
yeah.
That's.
That
is
the
way
it
works.
G
If
you
get
a
refusal,
because
you
don't
have
all
the
information
in
and
you
have
to
resubmit
again
well,
it
is
a
new
fee
and
that
may
seem
you
know
a
bit
unjust
and
a
bit
hard
in
some
ways,
but
and
that
that
is
the
way
the
system
works.
G
You
know
quick
conversation
at
the
planning
reception
to
get
a
steer
on
whether
in
principle
that
you
know,
we
think
it's
acceptable
and
also
the
type
of
information
that's
required,
but
applications
that
come
in
without
any
pre-application
advice
very
often
well,
not
very
often,
but
in
some
cases
can
fail
to
provide
the
information
that
we
need
to
assess
it.
So
that's
why
coming
back
that
our
airport,
the
change
in
legislation
and
may
enable
us
to
make
sure
that
applications
don't
get
into
the
system
until
all
the
information
we
need
is
there.
G
I
Now,
just
to
come
back,
certainly
agents
need
to
be
encouraged
to
to
provide
all
the
information,
that's
required
and
maybe
on
the
other
side
of
the
coin.
I
Here
it
would
be
that
if
agents
know
that
that
application
will
be
because
of
this,
that
they're
all
know
where
they're
going
in
this
before
they
submit
the
application,
and
I
do
think
by
working
with
the
agents
and
on
these
issues-
and
I
hope
that
maybe
on
the
back
of
this
report,
that
they
will
take
up
more
and
board
on
the
applications
and
then
hopefully
go
through
speedily
and
cause
less
problems.
I
We
do
note
the
odd
one
going
through
in
delegated
lists.
Sometimes
that
you
see
a
refusal
on
other
information
was,
was
asked
for,
but
wasn't
forthcoming.
I
don't
know
why
these
applications,
but
it's
it's
something
that
the
agent
should
know
that
when
that
goes
in,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day
I
would
send
back
this
applicant,
who
has
to
foot
the
middle
here.
So
hopefully
it
doesn't.
Okay.
Thank
you.
D
Thanks,
thank
you
alderman
anderson
and
then
I'm
not
saying
any
lights
on
so
just
give
me
some
thoughts.
D
It
certainly
was
an
interesting
report,
parade
and,
and
one
thing
that
they'd
jump
out
and
sort
of
touched
on
was
the
transparency
of
the
planned
canadians,
planning
committee
meetings
and
steps
which
I
acknowledge,
some
of
which
we
are
doing
to
improve
the
situation,
but
we
could
always
aim
for
better
country
nicholson
mentioned,
who
provides
the
leadership
of
plan,
and
this
poses
elected
community
leaders
will
all
provide
a
bit
of
leadership
in
their
and
their
own
rights
and
at
this
committee
as
well
and
one
thing-
and
I
think
there
was
a
bbc
article-
came
out
off
the
back
of
the
other
report
expressing
that
low
public
confidence
and
planning
committees,
and
what
we
can
do
to
sort
of
you
know
improve
that.
D
One
thing
which
would
have
a
debate
about
was
about
two
two
and
a
half
years
ago
was
the
automatic
recording
of
planned
committee
votes
when
there
was
a
disagreement.
I
remember
we
had
a
good
debate
on
that,
but
it
was
ultimately
voted
down.
I
think
that
could
be
a
good
step
in
order
to
help
improve
the
transparency
at
this
committee
and,
just
in
general,
provide
a
bit
more
public
confidence
to
your
constituents.
D
So
suppose
I
take
this
opportunity
now
to
propose
that
again
and
that
proposal
will
be
where
there
is
a
disagreement
on
the
planning
application.
But
when
it
comes
to
vote
that
an
automatic
recorded
vote
is
taken
same
proposal
put
down
by
two
years
or
so
ago,
is
there
anyone
willing
to
second
that
proposal?
First
of
all
not
seeing
any
lights.
Oh
concert.
D
E
Yeah
chairman,
I
do
remember
with
a
good
debate
on
this
before
and
obviously
I
was
voted
on
and
didn't
go
through
and
and
I'll
be
honest,
it's
one
of
those
ones.
I
I
I'm
not
comfortable
with
just
been
through
out
the
community
floor.
I
think
I
don't
think
you've
given
good
enough
reasons.
Sure
I
think
you
know
it's
your
opinion.
You're,
given
you
know,
there's
no
there's
no
substantiation
to
it.
You
know
is
that
what
public
want?
I,
I
don't
think
it
is
like
we
need
to
find
out.
E
I
think
maybe
you
know
following
their
support.
There
needs
to
be
a
bit
of
a
a
a
review
and
maybe
have
a
workshop,
have
a
discussion
ourselves
rather
than
just
throw
it
in
the
committee
floor
and
put
the
vote,
because
I
I'm
not
in
the
position
chair
tonight
this
afternoon
to
to.
I
want
to
hear
more
about
this.
You
know
like,
as
I
say
it
is
recorded.
E
I
think
the
debate
the
last
time
went
to
it's
recorded
for
and
against
right
and-
and
I
would
love
to
know
the
statistics
and
the
number
of
planning
applications.
We
actually
do
up
to
sanctions.
Very
few,
I
think,
to
be
honest
with
you,
but
look
I
I
think
it
needs
more
drawn
out
just
a
pose
or
a
second
on
the
committee
floor
and
then
we
vote
against.
I
don't
think
that's
the
way
to
handle
it.
I
think
it's
to
have
a
great
discussion
with
between
ourselves
around
the
table.
E
Have
a
workshop
on
and
and
and
put
your
views
more
across.
I'm
not
condensed
chair
of
what
you're
saying
is
that's
going
to
restore
public
confidence.
You
know
it's
not
that
to
me:
it's
not
the
golden
bullet.
You
know.
I
think
we
need
to
find
it
what
what
it
is,
what
can
restore-
and
maybe
it's
not
our
council
at
all,
because
I
do
emphasize
again-
it's
dfi,
as
demon
has
said,
on
the
11
councils,
and
we
all
are
aware
of
other
things
that
go
on
in
other
countries.
D
Thank
you,
councilor
nicholson.
I
do
appreciate
your
contribution
on
this
and,
as
you
acknowledged,
we
did
have
a
really
good
third
debate
on
this
like
two
years
ago.
So
I'm
not
really
sure
about
your
comments,
just
throwing
it
out
there
when
it
has
been
an
issue.
We've
discussed
before
again
as
a
member
of
the
committee
and
entitled
to
make
a
proposal,
and
it
has
been
second
in
terms
of
will
it
be
a
golden
bullet,
I
would
say,
probably
not.
D
However,
there
are
many
steps
towards
perfection,
and
I
think
this
could
be
a
step
along
that
line.
You're
asking
do
people
want,
I
think,
more
transparency.
I
think,
generally,
that
there
would.
Yes,
ultimately,
we
are
accountable
to
them.
I
know
maybe
most
people
don't
pay
too
much
attention
to
what
goes
on
at
committees
and
kinds
of
meetings
unless
it
directly
impacts
them
and
one
of
the
ways
that
kinds
of
business
does
directly
impact
them.
It's
like
the
plan
applications
in
their
area,
or
you
know
in
their
neighborhood
kind
of
things
like
that.
D
So
I
would
say
that
you
know
I
would
still
be
up
for
keeping
my
proposal
on
the
floor
and
that
it
will
be
a,
I
suppose,
a
small
step
in
the
right
direction,
with
more
steps
to
come
as
as
damien
has
outlined.
But
I
think
I
think
it
would
still
be
content
to
keep
it
on
the
floor,
but
see
if
you
put
your
light
back
on
so
bring
it
back
in
the
game
country.
E
Just
a
plain
clarification:
I'm
not
against
transparency.
What
I
said
was
people
want
more
confidence
in
the
planet
committee.
We
need
to
find
out
what
that
is.
You
know
what
I
mean
and
I
do
agree.
It's
not
one
thing,
it's
a
serious
things,
but
I
think
is
there's
a
bigger
picture
here
and
I
do
think
you
know
sort
of
I'm
not
in
the
position
tonight
this
afternoon
to
sort
of
say:
I'm
forward
your
proposing
or
are
against
it,
because
I
need
no
more
information
in
relation
to
it.
F
Thank
you
chair.
I
don't
disagree
with
anything
either
yourself
or
chrysler
nicholson
says
in
terms
of
recorded
vote.
Anybody
can
I'll
support.
Your
proposal,
chair,
normal
colleague,
is
already
seconded.
Anybody
can
see
the
vote
if
they
want
they
can
log
on
to
youtube
and
I've
been
watching
council
meeting
in
real
time
or
they
can
watch
it
at
their
own
leisure.
They
will
be
able
to
see
what
ways
members
votes,
because
we
don't
hold
our
votes
in
sacred.
It's
it's
out
there
already.
F
So
you
know
at
the
same
time
that
information
is
in
the
public
domain
you're
proposing
that
will
have
a
recorded
vote.
It's
already
there
and
I
agree
with
you
in
transparency.
You
know
it's
it's
an
extra
layer
of
it,
but
you
know
it's
it's
maybe
you
know
it's
a
voter
probably
didn't
need
to
have
today
a
well
supported
share
on
it,
but
that
information's
in
the
public
domain
anyway.
So
that's
just
the
point
I
wanted
to
make
thanks
chad.
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
councilor
savage.
I
think
it
is.
You
know
important
to
record
the
votes
in
the
minutes
and
so
on,
because
who
knows
what
could
happen
with
our?
You
know:
youtube
links
and-
and
things
like
that
now
we've
been
doing
that
at
the
present,
but
when
we
go
back
to
post
covert
guidelines,
while
we
continue
or
what
so,
I
think
it's
important
to
have
a
record
there,
because
sometimes,
whenever
you
have
people
get
out
where'd,
you
go
that
it's
not
being
clients
sort
of
that
that
certain
people
know.
D
But
if
it's
there
it's
in
black
and
white,
when
there
is
a
division
so
to
speak,
I
think
I
think
it
is
something
useful.
But
again
I
think
it's
only
a
small
thing
country
next
time
see
you
later
on
again.
E
Chairman
I
I've
listened
obviously
yourself
and
on
country,
savage
and
and
look,
I
think,
just
something
coming
to
my
head
there
and
there's
a
governor's
review,
you're
gonna
in
relation
to
council.
I
think
maybe
this
should
be
something
maybe
that
don't
carry
this
part
of
the
governance
review
and
do
it
that
way.
Sir
ran
us
as
a
committee.
Just
you
know
doing
her
own
thing
and
whatever
that's
that's.
It's
a
governance
issue.
It's
an
all
council
issue.
So
so,
therefore
we
already
called
abram.
I
make
our
proposal
check.
D
Thanks,
thank
you.
Thank
you
country
nixon,
so
I've
got
that
recorded
proposal
there.
The
only
thing
I
would
say
is
that
we
know
that
the
planning
committee
section
of
this
meeting
operates
under
different.
You
know
guidelines
on
sort
of
a
normal
meeting.
You
know
with
our
you
know,
people
who
can
come
and
object.
So
that's
why
my
proposal
would
only
apply
to
the
likes
of
four
o'clock
onwards
and
the
planning
recording
maintenance
and
then
with
the
new
normal
status.
For
you
know
the
normal.
D
You
know
three
o'clock
meeting,
let's
see
if
we
get
a
second
or
aldon
wilson.
J
Yeah
a
second
and
just
odd
that
you
know
I'll
say
on
that.
I
just
thought
you
know
sort
of
annoys
me
about
people
through
about
you
know
lines
like
transparency.
You
know
you
can't
get
more
transparent
than
this
committee.
It's
beamed
across
youtube.
Anybody
can
check
in
anybody
can
see
anything
about.
They
can
probably
come
now
back
to
the
meeting
and
see
how
people
vote.
J
I
just
lament
the
fact
that
people
throw
these
sort
of
assertions
about,
or
you
know,
pictures
that
we
need
to
do
this
because
of
you
know,
there's
a
lack
of
transparency.
K
J
No
lack
of
transparency,
absolutely
no
lag.
You
know
it's
as
transparent
as
that
glass.
You
know
what
I
mean
basically,
so
I
don't
think
there's
a
need
for
it
at
all.
It's
performed
quite
well
over
coming
what
seven
years
now
so
don't
see
the
need
for
it,
but
happy
enough
to
sagging.
Okay,
it's
our
next
proposal
that
it
goes
to
governance,
but
again
just
put
on
record.
I
don't
think
you
get
a
more
transparent
committee
in
the
council
to
be
fair
and
we're
fairly
up
to
this
point.
Anyway,
it
was
fairly.
J
You
know
steered
clear
to
be
to
be
fair
on
any
controversy,
and
I
would
imagine
that
will
continue.
I
suppose
it's
sure
I
don't
know
what
I'm
sure
it's
not
really
somewhere.
Where
you
can.
You
know,
I
feel
a
chairman's
role
is
to
conduct
the
meeting.
J
You
know
pursue
these
types
of
things
when
you're,
not
in
the
chair,
you
might
see
the
chairs
that
sort
of
sacrosanct
rule
where
you're
just
dealing
with
them
eating
dealing
with
the
running
of
the
meeting-
and
I
you
know
that's
what
I
did
in
my
first
year
in
this
community-
didn't
seek
to
trump
on
any.
You
know
personal
sort
of
yeah.
J
It's
more
about
the
role
of
the
meeting
and
making
sure
the
business
is
done
without
fearing
down
these
paths,
but
I
know,
as
with
all
democracy,
she
can
to
your
extent
you
can
do
whatever
you
want,
but
there
is
an
underlying
sort
of
respect
for
the
chair
and
the
you
know
on
the
chairmanship
of
meetings.
I'm
not
telling
you
enough,
I'm
just
saying
that's
where
I
see
it.
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you
all
the
one
wilson,
I'm
not
your
just
to
clarify,
I
don't
think,
there's
a
few
or
a
lack
of
transparency
at
this
committee
or
in
planned
marriage
in
general,
but
I
think
there
could
be
an
improvement,
as
it's
been
outlined
at
significant
degree
within
the
audit
report
itself,
which
they
these
sort
of
proposals
coming
on
the
back
of
in
terms
of
the
chairman's
role
to
touch
on
it.
You
have
to
understand
most
of
the
time
sherman
trolls
clicking
buttons
here,
bringing
people
in
from
order
to
or
debate.
D
But
as
you
say,
you
know
you
have
the
right
to
make
proposals,
and
I
will
do
you
know
in
my
role.
I
I
suppose
one
of
the
like
that
I
hope
to
bring
some
additional
transparency
to
this
committee
and
other
committees
on
the
council,
and
I
feel
that
I'm
I'm
playing
my
role.
Okay,
so
that's
that's!
That's
about
just
a
clap
for
that
proposals
made
by
cancer
nicholas
and
second
by
alderman.
Wilson
have
them
are
discussing
that
governance
review.
So
if
two
proposes
on
the
floor
any
more
speakers
on
this
item.
D
Okay,
so
we'll
take
the
first
proposal.
First,
as
our
agreement
on
that
proposal,
there's
no
no
agreement
on
that
proposal.
So
then
move
to
a
vote
on
the
proposal
from
south
second
by
councillor,
duffy
led
to
the
automatic
recording
of
planning
committee
votes
on
planning
applications
when
there
is
a
disagreement
and
I'll
request,
a
recorded
vote
in
that
one.
D
So
members
I'm
going
to
bring
in
here
one
the
time
and
just
I
think
we
just
need
to
wait
until
we're
on
the
screen
in
order
to
for
you
to
cast
your
vote
so
first
up
just
the
car,
for
this
is
my
proposal.
Second,
by
councillor,
duffy
first
up
is
alderman
anderson.
J
J
H
D
D
Three
to
six
against,
so
I
just
thought
it
was
quite
about
those
in
favor
concert
of
the
country,
savage
country,
library,
those
opposed
alderman,
allison,
baldwin's,
twitter,
album,
wilson
country
mcclellan
concerned
nicholson,
councillor
wilson,
okay,
so
that
proposes
failed.
That's
why
I
don't
know
whether
country
nicholson's
proposal
is
automatically
carried
in
any
disagreement
to
it.
I've
seen
any
disagreement
tips
without
proposals
carried
okay.
Thank
you
members.
So
that
was
item
3.2
item
for
information,
any
other
questions
on
it.
D
N
The
department
published
his
report
on
their
view
into
the
implementation
of
the
act
on
the
27th
of
january
2022,
and
a
copy
of
this
report
is
attached
to
appendix
5..
The
call
for
evidence
attracted
55
responses
in
the
vast
majority
of
comments
related
to
look
and
development
plans,
development
management
and
enforcement.
N
Instinctive
to
address
the
findings
from
the
review.
Dfi
has
made
16
recommendations
covering
aspects
of
the
planning
act
in
relation
to
local
development
plans.
The
department
acknowledges
the
call
for
reform
of
the
process,
but
does
not
consider
that
a
fundamental
review
is
required
until
such
time
as
a
number
of
councils
ldps
have
been
adopted.
N
The
department
believes
the
issues
can
be
addressed
through
better
guidance
and
reviewing
the
statutory
list
of
consultees
and
has
committed
to
monitor
and
review
current
processes.
Following
adoption
of
a
number
of
ldps,
the
department
is
committed
to
add
to
or
amend
development
plan
guidance
as
required
and
we'll
also
undertake
a
review
of
the
publicity
and
advertisement
requirements
associated
with
plan
making
to
determine
whether
there
are
ways
to
enhance
online
digital
means
of
communication
in
plan
making,
specifically
to
improve
accessibility
in
relation
to
development
management.
N
The
department
acknowledges
there
are
a
number
of
areas
which
merge
further
review
and
potential
legislative
change.
This
includes
a
review
of
the
existing
thresholds
and
categories
of
development
to
determine
if
they
remain
fit
for
purpose.
The
department
is
also
committed
to
bringing
forward
proposals
for
both
online
and
in-person
engagement
at
the
pre-application
community
consultation
process
and
has
committed
to
bringing
forward
legislation
to
improve
the
quality
of
applications
on
submission,
which
is
one
of
the
main
obstacles
to
timely
decision
making
and
obviously
something
that
we've
touched
on
earlier
in
the
meeting.
N
The
department
have
also
committed
to
undertake
a
general
review
of
planning
phase,
including
an
automatic
annual
inflationary
uplift
when
all
the
recommendations
by
the
council
and
the
responses
to
the
call
for
evidence
have
been
included
in
the
16
recommendations.
The
recommendations
that
have
been
proposed
are
welcomed.
Thank
you,
chair,
happy
to
take
any
questions.
D
Thanks,
thank
you.
Roshin
members.
That's
an
idea
of
information,
any
questions
for
russian,
I'm
not
saying
any
lights
up.
Thank
you.
Rushing
on
that
one.
So
item
3.4
against
an
information
item.
That's
response
from
dsc
in
relation
to
a
request
to
reconsider
the
lesson
of
lauren
mounter
and
a
common
that
was
discussed.
I
think
it
was
last
month
and
over
to
helen
strips
is
going
to
take
us
through
the
response.
Thank
you
home.
A
Thank
you
turn
members
will
recall
at
a
meeting
of
this
committee
on
the
12th
of
january.
It
was
agreed
to
write
to
the
minister
for
communities
and
historic
environment
division
following
the
department's
decision
not
to
proceed
with
the
proposed
listing
of
laurel
mind
located
at
41k
bergen
road,
aka
common,
in
addition
to
wider
concerns
regarding
the
listing
process
and
list
of
buildings,
response
has
been
received
from
ian
greenaway,
the
director
of
historic
environment,
division
who's,
also
acting
on
behalf
of
the
minister.
A
copy
of
the
response
can
be
found
at
appendix
6..
A
Details
of
the
matters
raised
with
the
minister
and
the
aha
are
set
out
in
this
report.
In
the
response,
the
department
has
indicated
that
had
officers
have
reviewed
the
case
and
have
reaffirmed
the
decision
not
to
proceed
with
the
listing
of
laurel
amount
in
relation
to
financial
assistance
for
the
owners
of
listed
buildings.
The
department
acknowledges
the
reduced
levels
of
available
grants
through
to
make
funding
available
regarding
consultation
with
owners
and
occupiers
of
proposed
listed
buildings.
A
The
department
sets
out
the
current
process
and,
whilst
there
is
no
statutory
obligation
for
them
to
consult
with
owners,
they
issue
corresponds
to
owners
at
the
same
time
as
consulting
councils.
However,
the
department
has
indicated
that
committee's
comments
in
relation
to
a
statutory
requirement
will
be
brought
forward
to
the
next
review
of
the
staff
degree
provisions.
A
The
department
also
glances
stages
of
the
consideration
of
the
listening
of
laurel
matching
to
correspondence
issued
to
council
officers
on
6th
of
december,
which
suggested
the
surveying
of
the
building
preservation
notice
on
laurel
amount.
The
department
has
also
indicated
that
it
is
currently
reviewing
building
preservation,
notice
processes
to
consider
whether
further
refinements
may
be
appropriate.
A
However,
in
the
case
of
the
mind,
it
is
indicated
that
if
the
building
preservation
notice
would
have
been
served
in
early
december
may
have
prohibited
the
subsequent
works.
This
also
suggests
the
council
may
wish
to
consider
the
extent
of
delegation
to
this
committee
and
officers
regarding
both
listing
consultations
and
supplies.
A
As
members
are
aware,
the
serving
of
a
building
preservation
notice
is
not
a
delegated
matter
and
the
earliest
opportunity
to
present
the
matter
to
this
committee
was
the
12th
of
january.
By
this
time,
officers
were
aware
of
works
having
been
carried
out
to
alter
historic
fabric
of
the
building.
However,
in
advance
of
bringing
this
item
before
this
committee,
confirmation
was
sought
from
dfc
that
its
opinion
on
architectural
or
historic
significance
of
the
building
remained
unchanged.
D
Thank
you
helen
for
taking
taking
us
through
that
report
yeah.
I
suppose
that
was
disappointing,
that
you
know
that
they've
decided
not
to
listen,
but
it
certainly
was
worth
us
at
least
giving
it
a
go.
D
Ask
them
to
reconsider,
because
you
know,
as
counter
nicholson
said
multiple
times
when
it's
gone,
it's
gone,
but
it
looks
like
it's
going
to
be
gone
on
this
occasion.
Only
question
or
query
would
have
in
terms
of
you
know
their
suggestions
around
modification
to
that
scheme
of
delegation
understand.
Maybe
that's
currently
being
reviewed.
Well,
that
possible
amendment,
or
at
least
discussion
about
it,
be
part
of
that
review.
I
don't
want
to
question
for
damien
or
or
helen
a
demon.
G
Yes
sure
we
could
certainly
include
that
matter
within
the
the
next
review
of
the
scheme
of
delegation
happy
to
do
that.
D
Thank
you,
damian.
Any
other
queries
on
this
one
members.
Let's
see
another
hands
up
so
again,
thank
you
again,
helen
for
taking
us
through
that
one.
Okay,
members,
we're
on
the
item
three
point:
five
update
and
plan
case
loads
and
han
over
to
damian
mulligan,
head
of
planning.
G
Yeah,
thank
you,
chair
members,
as
you'll
note
from
the
report
before
your
department
received
144
applications
during
the
month
of
february
and
decided
150,
which
brings
our
live
caseload
number
to
1
498..
That
is
six
down
on
last
month's
total
and
I'm
happy
to
report
is
almost
90
dying
on
where
we
were
at
the
end
of
september.
Some
good
progress
has
therefore
been
made
members.
G
One
final
point
to
draw
your
attention
to
remembers
is
that,
relatively
speaking,
a
very
high
number
of
applications
were
called
in
during
the
month
of
february.
That
number
was
11,
bringing
the
total
for
year
to
date
to
41
and
while
officers
recognize
the
importance
of
operating
call-in
arrangement,
this
high
number
is
having
significant
implications
for
live
caseload
numbers
and
for
processing
times.
Thank
you,
chair
and
happy
to
take
any
questions.
Members.
D
E
Yeah
thanks,
sir
thanks
damian
for
your
report
and
yeah.
Look,
I
think,
that's
the
first
time
damian
you
haven't
been
pushed
more
up
a
hill
in
a
month
it
it
looks
like
you're
you're
getting
more
out
than
than
it's
coming
in.
So
if
that
trend
continues,
hopefully
you'll
you'll
be
able
to
get
your
way
through
the
the
backlog
and
the
church
says,
like
you
know,
obviously
the
committee,
I'm
sure
we
all
thank
all
the
members
of
the
planet.
E
You
know
staff
who,
who
obviously
are
doing
overtime,
etc
and
things
to
try
and
sort
of
keep
keep
keep
the
the
the
the
numbers
turning
over
and
and
and
and
dealing
with
applications,
and
I
want
to
sort
of
ask
you
about
the
the
11
call-ins
damon.
I
I
agree
with
you.
If
you
look
at
the
stats,
it's
quite
a
spike
in
in
in
the
context.
So
do
you
see
any
reason
for
that?
I
suppose
where
I'm
coming
from
is
is:
is
there
a.
E
Hesitance
on
the
agents
or
the
applicant
to
discuss
obligations
with
the
planning
officers
to
try
and
find
some
sort
of
you
know
compromise.
Are
these
really
are
these
sort
of
you
know
last
chance,
saloons
and
then
they
go
to
elected
member
and
then
elect
the
member
calls
it
in
and
and
and
again.
I
suppose
it's
just
understanding
that
that
that
process.
Because
of
this,
this
trend
continues.
E
You
know
it
leaves
us,
as
a
committee
going
to
have
a
a
problem
because,
as
as
you
know,
those
11
applications
now
to
come
to
this
committee
they're
adding
on
to
the
the
applications.
As
you
said
yourself,
there
we
have
11,
majors
and,
like
let's
be
honest,
the
majors
are
the
ones
that
really
make
the
the
economically
the
the
difference
and
be
it
and
job
creation
itself
out
there
within
the
community.
E
That's
not
undermining
what
what
the
other
applications
are,
and
everybody
deserves
to
to
use
the
planning
process
for
it's
what
it
what
it's
meant
to
be,
but
I
suppose
I
would
like
to
be
more
sort
of
what
your
thoughts
are.
Damien
on
that,
you
think
it's
a
one-off,
or
do
you
think
this
is
something
that
potentially
could
be
more
and
more
common
going
forward
and
has
there
something
changed
in
policy
or
something
that
basically
that
we've
got
this
this
spike,
because
that
would
worry
mature.
Thank
you.
G
Yeah
through
the
chart,
thanks
concert,
nicholson,
yeah,
it's
a
highly
unusual
number
11.
I
mean
members
will
know
from
you
know
for
the
beginning
of
the
business
year,
it
tends
to
be
around
sort
of
maximum
of
three
colons
a
month.
So
this
is
a
highly
unusual
number
and
I'm
not
able
to
say
exactly
what
the
the
reason
is
for
that
to
be
perfectly
honest
with
you,
but
it's
you
know
it's
a
bit
of
an
anomaly.
G
I
suppose
you
know
when
you
look
at
the
general
picture,
but
members
will
be
aware
that
the
call-in
arrangement
is
one.
We've
had
a
very,
very
good
look.
That
is
part
of
the
service
review
that
we've
undertaken
and
you
know
we
tried
to
make
the
process
more
robust
and
more
transparent.
G
You
know
happening
again
here
to
where
the
mia
were
and
but
you
know,
we've
introduced
a
template
for
members
to
give
reasons
for
calling,
because
again
that's
the
point
that
the
miao
picked
up
on
and
it's
to
try
and
make
the
process
a
bit
more
robust.
But
it
does
add
another
layer
for
members
which
is
inconvenient,
and
I
understand
that.
G
But
it's
a
matter
that
I
think
we
should
keep
under
review
and
you
know
whether
we
need
to
look
at
introducing
additional
measures
where,
if
an
application
is
called
and
do
we
for
example,
and
require
that
the
member
who
called
it
in
has
to
speak
at
the
committee-
and
that's
only
you
know
a
possibility-
I'm
not
suggesting
that
here
and
now,
but
I'm
just
you
know
there
are
ways
of
considering
how
we
could
address
this
particular
issue.
G
As
it
comes
as
councilor
nicholson
says,
it
does
become
a
bit
of
a
problem
for
us,
so
you
know
that's
something
we
can
certainly
keep
on
under
review
members.
E
D
Thanks,
thank
you
country,
nicholson,
yeah.
I
noticed
that
myself
and
I
don't
know
whether
any
additional
training
could
be
offered
for
non-planning
committee
members.
You
know
we
deal
with
infos
every
month,
so
the
policy
back
to
front,
but
there's
always
new
ones,
but
well
that
could
be
considered
demian.
G
Yeah
through
the
church
yeah
sure
we
have
delivered
training
for
all
members
recently
and
so
that
that
has
been
done.
But
haven't
said
that
you
know
look.
We
are
committed
to
providing
ongoing
capacity
building
for
for
our
members
so
and
that
we
will
be
looking
at
a
program
of
training
for
members
as
we
move
forward
through
into
the
next
business
here
at
nhr,
so
happy
to
take
that
on
board.
J
You
know,
I
think,
they're
the
ones
that
you
know
provide
the
most
difficulty
in
terms
of
also
for
us
as
well,
because
we
can
see
pluses
and
minuses
and
infiltrations
was
the
case
in
recent
months
and
also
if
you
move
out
down
into
the
counselor
base,
if
you
like
and
who
aren't
on
the
committee
well,
the
arguments
may
seem
a
wee
bit
more
tantalizing
to
them
in
terms
of
why
it
should
be
taken,
whereas
when
we
get
into
the
minutiae
it
here
and
there's
other
issues
that
maybe
aren't
considered
by
pl
by
non-planning
company
councillors,
so
I
mean
we've
built
up
a
bit
of
a
knowledge
base,
just
through
the
longevity
of
this
committee
and
all
the
various
infills
that
we
have
and
come
across.
J
D
Thank
you
all
know,
awesome
that
will
tech
take
that
on
board.
Okay,
any
other.
Any
other
comments.
Members
are
happy
to
note.
Okay,
happy
note
that,
and
again
thank
you
demon
for
taking
us
through
that.
Okay,
remember
we're
on
the
agenda
item
four:
I'm
starting
with
item
4.1
signing
for
a
decision.
I'm
a
street
naming
report
for
aiden
brooke,
I'm
going
to
hand
over
tom
lowry
head
of
building
control
to
present
this
item,
tom.
O
Thank
you,
chair
and
good
afternoon
members
miss
item.
4.1
is
a
request
for
the
name
of
the
housing
development
assistant
of
180
dwellings
such
as
the
nearly
road
and
bandbridge
and
details,
and
are
contained
within
the
report
officer
appendix
one
applicant's
preferred
name
for
this.
Development
is
eden
brooke
and
the
applicant's
reason
for
the
proposed
name
is
that
the
site
adjacent
to
the
long-established
development
known
as
edenville
avenue
and
there's
also
a
geographical
video
of
a
stream
running
through
the
site
and
with
brooklyn
alternative
for
the
inner
stream.
So
officers.
P
D
Thank
you,
annie
seconder,
for
the
proposal
ultimate
fighter
I'll.
D
D
Okay,
thank
you,
tom!
We're!
Staying
with
tom
for
item
4.2
item
for
information,
just
an
update
on
building
control.
O
Thank
you,
sir.
Yes
disrupted
members
on
the
workload
for
the
department
for
the
11
months
from
first
of
april
to
20th
of
february,
as
noted
in
appendix
2,
in
the
first
11
months
this
year
we
have
received
3054
applications,
which
is
actually
332
more
than
the
equivalent
period
for
last
year.
O
These
projects
have
a
notional
construction
investment
value
of
just
under
208
million,
as
during
this
11
month
period,
we
undertook
just
over
2200
plan
assessments,
and-
and
this
is
strategy
notices
on
all
of
these,
the
department
has
also
completed
almost
3,
000,
sorry,
13,
400,
site
inspections.
In
the
last
11
months,
we
currently
have
a
12
percent
vacancy
within
the
department
and
some
of
those
long
term,
unfortunately,
so
those
are
affecting
our
processing
times
just
currently,
but
we
are
working
on
the
hr
to
to
address
these.
O
The
department
has
also
continued
to
deliver
the
conscious
property
certificate
function
after
the
convention
properties,
and
this
11-month
period
was
received
and
administered
3803
new
applications
and
issued
3
820
certificates
and
two
solicitors
and
agents
written
to
property
sales,
ensure
this
is
for
information
but
happy
to
take
any
questions.
Members
may
have.
D
Thank
you,
tom,
okay
members,
any
questions
or
queries
on
that
report.
It's
known
for
information,
I'm
happy
to
note,
thank
you
and
thank
you
tom
for
presenting
those
items.
D
Okay,
members
jenner
item
five,
which
is
the
confidential
section
of
the
meeting,
actually
get
our
proposal
and
the
second
order
to
move
into
committee
proposed
by
councillor
nixon
seconded
by
alderman
anderson,
okay,
members
have
to
read
out
the
following
statement:
members
and
online
viewers.
In
accordance
with
schedule,
6
of
the
local
government
act
exempt
information.
We
will
now
be
moving
into
a
confidential
session
of
the
meeting.
D
O
Q
D
Agenda
item
seven
corresponds:
there's
two
items
of
correspondence:
we're
just
gonna
note
them
unless
any
members
of
any
questions
or
queries.
With
regards
to
those
two
items,
I'm
saying
the
knights
on
our
hands
up.
So
there's
no,
those
two
items,
the
general
item:
it's
any
other
business.
I
don't
have
any
other
business
with
me.
So
that's
the
first
section
of
our
meet
and
complete
so
we're
going
to
have
a
short
recess
into
our
planning
applications.
D
What
we
say
will
start
at
4,
30
pm
sharp,
that's
in
13
minutes.
So
we'd
ask
the
plan
our
it
team
to
pause
the
live,
feed
and
we'll
bounce
back
at
4,
30.
R
R
R
B
D
D
D
In
doing
so,
cancers
endeavor
to
ascertain
the
information
which
they
feel
is
necessary
to
enable
them
to
determine
the
application.
However,
members
of
the
public
should
note
that
councillors
who
counters
will
not
reach
a
conclusion
as
to
whether
an
application
should
be
approved,
refused
or
deferred
until
debate
on
the
application
has
concluded.
D
Members
of
it
eight
items
to
decide
on
here
so
we're
starting
off
with
appendix
one
which
is
application
number
area,
eight
slash.
Twenty
nineteen
slash
zero.
Six
three
two
slash
f,
just
had
to
declare
I
was
contacted
by
a
relative
of
the
applicant,
but
I
explained
to
them
that
I
was
a
member
of
the
planning
committee.
I
cannot
express
it
be
on
the
application
until
it
came
to
committee
such
a
failure,
I'm
able
to
still
be
able
to
take
part
in
on
the
application
so
with
a
number
of
people
making
representations
tonight.
N
This
application
seeks
retrospective
provision
for
the
erection
of
a
single
wind
turbine
and
ancillary
development
on
lands,
320
meters
northeast
of
30
grand
to
road
tomorrow
the
turbine
is
a
hub
height
of
40
meters
in
router
diameter
of
27
and
the
ancillary
development
is
comprised
of
a
substation
of
a
small
section
of
underground.
Cable
access
to
the
site
will
be
via
an
existing
farmland
way.
The
application
site
is
in
the
rural
area
and
is
comprised
of
a
portion
of
a
larger
agricultural
field
with
the
wider
field
bounded
by
hedges
and
poster
ware
fences.
N
The
immediate
areas
around
the
side
is
defined,
the
open
countryside
with
farm
dwellings
and
their
associated
buildings
and
other
rural
dwellings.
The
mooren
aomb
lies
approximately
two
kilometers
to
the
west
and
there's
one
other
turbine
in
close
proximity
to
the
application
site,
450
meters
to
the
west,
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
grancha
road.
N
By
way
of
background
planet
mission
was
granted
in
2013
by
the
former
doa
for
the
erection
of
a
wind
turbine
with
a
40
meter
hub
height
and
a
blade
diameter
of
27
metres
on
lands.
Approximately
15
meters
to
the
northeast
of
the
current
application
site
following
the
erection
of
the
turbine,
it
was
determined
that
the
turbine
was
not
erected
as
approved.
The
original
permission
has
now
expired
and
can
no
longer
be
implemented.
Therefore,
there's
no
fallback
position.
N
An
enforcement
notice
has
been
served
on
the
site
and
this
notice
has
been
appealed
to
the
plan
and
appeals
commission.
The
proposal
has
been
assessed
against
planner
policy
statement.
18,
which
states
the
development
that
generates
energy
from
renewable
energy
resources
will
be
permitted
subject
to
number
of
criteria
in
assessing
the
impact
on
human
health
and
residential
immunity.
The
potential
impacts
arising
from
noise
shadow
flicker
ice
through
one
reflective
light
have
been
considered
in
detail
in
the
report.
N
In
terms
of
noise,
a
noise
impact
assessment
was
submitted
in
support
of
the
application,
which
identified
a
number
of
noise
sensitive
receptors
on
the
sleeveless
boney
road
in
grancha
road.
The
council's
environmental
health
department
has
been
consulted
and
have
advised
that
the
noise
impact
assessment
predicts
that
the
turbine
should
not
be
within
the
limit
set
using
etsy,
as
cited
in
the
guidance
to
bps18
subject
to
conditions.
N
In
relation
to
shadowflagger
pps18
states
that
only
properties
within
130
degrees,
either
side
of
the
north
relative
to
the
turbine
can
be
affected
at
these
latitudes.
In
the
uk
it
goes
on
to
state
that,
at
a
distance
greater
than
10
times
ruler
diameter
from
a
turbine,
the
potential
of
shadow
flicker
is
very
low.
N
It
is
recommended
that
shadow
flicker
at
neighboring
dwellings
should
not
exceed
30
hours
per
year
or
30
minutes
per
day.
In
this
case,
the
proposed
rotor
diameter
is
27
meters
and,
as
such
10
times,
lower
diameter
is
270
meters
officers
note
there
are
no
properties
within
the
10
times
rear
diameter
distance,
130
degrees
outside
of
north.
N
Notwithstanding
this,
a
shadow,
flicker
assessment
has
been
carried
out
in
respect
of
the
development
and
the
findings
of
the
assessment
states
that
under
worst
case
scenario,
no
property
within
or
just
beyond
10
times.
Rotor
diameter
of
the
retrospective
turbine
would
experience
more
than
30
hours
per
year
or
30
minutes
of
shadow
effects
per
day,
all
properties
associated
with
experience
less
than
the
pps18
limits,
or
no
effects
at
all.
The
report
concludes
that
no
mitigation
is
therefore
required.
N
However,
in
this
case,
the
turbine
has
been
on
site
and
operating
for
some
time,
correspondence
has
been
received
from
a
nearby
residential
property
questioning
the
findings
of
the
shadow
flicker
report
and
stating
that
at
present,
the
turbine
is
operating
outside
the
predicted
values
of
30
hours
per
year
or
30
minutes
of
shadow
effects
per
day.
In
response,
the
agent
dealing
with
the
application
has
advised
that
a
psds
system
can
be
satisfactorily
used
to
mitigate
against
shadow
flicker.
N
Survey
was
submitted
and
supported
the
application
and
ned
accept
the
development
is
unlikely
to
significantly
impact
the
local
bat
population.
A
red
kite
survey
was
also
submitted
in
nad,
accept
that
the
development
would
not
have
a
significant
adverse
impact
on
the
population
of
red
kites
within
the
surrounding
area
and
northern
ireland.
N
In
relation
to
features
of
built
heritage,
significance,
a
wrath
lies
approximately
470
metres
to
the
west
of
the
application
site.
Given
the
separation
distances,
there's
no
requirement
to
consult
htd
for
their
comments.
Nor
does
the
proposal
engage
any
of
the
policies
in
ppsx
or
the
correspondent
sections
of
the
spps
in
terms
of
visual
media
and
landscape
character.
N
Officers
consider
that,
when
viewed
from
the
grancha
road,
sleeve
crew
is
visible
in
the
background,
and
from
this
viewpoint
the
turbine
would
raise
it
read
as
a
stark
and
dominant
feature
on
the
scaling
impacting
on
views
to
the
slave
group
summit
when
viewed
from
the
both
the
sleeve
nebulae
road
and
the
rock
island
road.
The
turbine
would
be
elevated
above
the
road
and
set
prominently
on
the
skyline.
N
The
turbine
would
read
as
a
stark
and
dominant
feature
in
the
landscape
and
would
cause
an
unacceptable
impact
on
the
visual
immunity
and
landscape
character
by
reason
of
its
size
scale
and
prominence
when
viewed
from
the
kate's
bridge
road.
The
turbine
would
be
viewed
in
conduction,
with
the,
in
conjunction
with
the
existing
turbine
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
grancha
road
and
at
some
points
with
two
turbines
further
to
the
east
located
off
the
roth
island.
N
Road
views
along
this
road
are
also
read
in
the
context
of
use
towards
the
aomb
and
the
slave
cruise
summit.
In
the
background
officers.
Consider
that
the
introduction
of
another
sizable
structure
in
this
landscape
would
further
impinge
on
the
distinctive
skyline
of
sleep
probe.
Cumulatively,
the
word
turbine
development
would
detract
from
the
scenic.
Quality
of
the
landscape
would
therefore
have
an
unacceptable
impact
on
the
visually
indian
landscape,
character
of
the
area.
N
N
For
the
reason
set
out,
officers
will
recommend
that
this
application
is
refused
as
the
proposals
counted
to
the
spps
and
policy
re-1b
of
pps18
renewable
energy,
and
that
the
proposed
development
would
have
an
unacceptable
adverse
impact.
The
visual
immunity
and
landscape
character
of
the
area.
So
I'll
just
take
you
through
the
presentation.
N
N
N
N
This
is
a
view
from
the
grancha
road
which
lies
to
the
east
of
the
application
site
and
another
view
of
the
turbine
from
the
branches
road
with
the
sleeve
crew.
In
the
background,
this
is
view
of
the
turbine
from
the
sleeve
naboli
road,
which
lies
to
the
east
of
the
application
site
and
just
another
view
from
further
down
the
sleeve
nebulae
road.
N
In
the
background-
and
this
is
another
view
of
the
turbine
from
the
cage
bridge
road
with
sleep
group
in
the
background
and
there's
another
one-
there-
you
can
see
again
the
two
turbines-
there
was
a
sleeve
crib
in
the
background
from
the
kids
bridge
road,
and
this
is
a
view
of
the
turbine
from
the
rather
island
road
which
lies
to
the
east,
and
you
have
the
sun's
low
on
the
sky
there,
because
you
can
just
about
see
the
turbine
on
the
skyline
there
and
again
that's
another
view
of
the
turbine
from
the
rough
island
road
sitting.
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
roshin
for
taking
us
through
that
report.
Okay,
remember:
there's
a
number
of
people
who
are
dying
to
make
representations
here
on
zoom,
so
we
go
through
them.
First
up
we
have
counselor
emma
mcnail
to
make
a
representation
and
objection
to
the
application
council,
mcnair
you're
very
welcome.
You
have
five
minutes.
Hopefully
there'll
be
a
clock
appearing
on
your
screen
and
that
will
have
a
five-minute
timer.
Okay,
there.
It
is
okay
country
mcnair,
it's
over
to
yourself
and
the
clock
will
begin
to
count
down
whenever
you
start
to
speak.
T
T
On
behalf
of
mr
liam
rooney
20
sleep,
my
body
road
tomorrow,
the
windmill
in
question
was
erected
about
six
years
ago,
unknown
to
the
rooney
family.
It
was
in
the
following
months
that
liam
rooney
started
to
large
complaints
about
the
flickering
shadows
that
were
being
created
throughout
his
home.
As
a
result
of
this
wind
turbine,
all
of
the
rooms
in
their
home
bar
one
are
being
affected.
T
T
G
T
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
country,
mcnair
and
you're
you're.
Well,
within
your
your
time
there
and
again
any
members
can
ask
any
questions
of
you
during
the
question
and
fears.
Okay,
members:
next
up
we
have
councillors
brown,
pope
and
councillors
kyle
savage
to
make
a
representation
in
support
of
the
application.
You
guys
have
five
minutes
in
total,
so
two
and
a
half
minutes
each
I'm
not
sure
which
of
your
shelves
is
seeking
to
go.
First,
there's
something
happening
on
my
id
screen
here,
so
I
can't
see
the
let's
get
that
sorted.
D
U
The
sewer
reason
given
in
the
planning
report
for
refusal
is
that
this
turbine
would
have
an
unacceptable
adverse
impact
on
the
visual
immunity
and
landscape
character
of
the
area.
However,
the
same
turbine
was
granted
planning
consent
in
2013
and
not
that
at
that
time
it
wasn't
considered
to
have
unacceptable
adverse
impacts
on
visual
immunity
and
a
landscape
character.
U
U
Furthermore,
I
believe
that
this
application
should
not
be
unduly
penalized
by
good
or
bad
planning
decisions
made
on
other
single
wind
turbine
applications
in
this
or
other
areas,
possibly
for
completely
different
or
other
reasons,
also
bearing
in
mind
that
this
turbine
has
been
in
place
since
2013-14
and
any
other
local
wind
turbine
decisions
made
after
the
erection
of
this
turbine
would
have
had
to
consider
this
turbine's
existence
as
part
of
their
application.
U
D
Thank
you,
councilor
pope,
so
the
clock
stopped
there.
Three
minutes
27
seconds
left
and
then
we're
hanging
over
the
counter
salvage
and
supposed
to
counter
salvage.
You
can
use
up
the
rest
of
the
time
so,
whenever
you're
you're
ready,
if
you've
been
mistaken,
then
the
clock
will
countdown.
V
Chair
sure,
on
committee
I
took
the
time
out
on
saturday
to
go
up
and
see
the
site
myself
and
I
kind
of
probably
about
10
wind
turbines
within
the
area.
You
know
visual
area,
and
this
was
originally
granted
permission.
The
original
one
was
in
2013
and
planning,
as
has
been
stated,
there's
been
no
change
in
planning
policy
since
then,
but
this
has
been
in
planning
since
2019.
This
application
is
in
front
of
you
here
now
and
there
is
a
slight
deviation
from
the
previous
approval.
V
You're
talking
a
matter
of
a
few
feet
away,
so
you
are,
you
know
so
in
my
eyes,
there's
not
a
big
difference
in
the
three
applications
here.
That
was
for
the
one
that
was
granted
and
the
one
that's
in
front
of
you
here
now
and
there's
no
change
in
the
wind
turbine
size.
There's
no
change
in
the
the
landscape
being
around.
You
know.
That's
gonna
affect
us
here,
so
doesn't
and
like
we're
talking
about
renewable
energy,
we're
in
this
phase
of
renewable
energy.
Where
else
do
we
put
a
wind
turbine?
V
D
Thanks,
thank
you,
counselor
savage.
Okay.
Next
up
we
have
ed
painter
to
make
a
representation
and
objections
to
the
application.
Mr
painter
you're
very
welcome.
You
should
see
the
three
minutes
up
in
front
of
you.
So
if
you
want
to
you
know
unmute
yourself
and
begin
to
give
you
a
representation
that
clock
will
begin
to
count
down
whenever
you
can
speak
so
over
to
yourself.
W
W
However,
my
concern
with
the
wind
turbine
in
the
grand
chero
is
that
of
shadow
flicker.
I
suffer
with
migraine.
The
national
headache
foundation
in
research
find
that
bright
lights
are
more
likely
to
trigger
a
migraine.
If
they're
of
a
flickering
quality,
a
slow
flicker
is
usually
much
more
irritating
than
a
rapid
one.
I
have
headaches
already.
I've
had
headaches
induced
by
this
flicker
and
I
take
medication
for
cm.
W
I
know
that
the
papers
supplied
in
pps18
renewable
energy
stated
that
the
size
of
the
turbine
will
flicker
should
be
visible
more
than
370
meters
and
no
property
falls
within
this
range.
I
also
note
that
pps18
was
written
in
2009
without
no
update.
Since
could
I
draw
your
attention
to
some
research
by
dr
tom
priestley
in
the
northeast
united
states
and
I've
provided
information
on
that,
where
flicker
can
be
up
to
1.4
kilometers
from
the
site?
W
Could
I
say
that
during
the
months
of
september,
my
home
on
the
sleeping
bully
road
is
reflected
as
the
sun
sets
by
this
flicker.
All
the
rooms
of
my
home
are
affected
by
it.
My
main
living
room
so
watching
television
is
very
difficult
and
I
also
serve
as
a
director
of
w5
and
the
odyssey
trust
who
operate
the
ssc
arena
like
you're,
like
your
counselors,
I
work
in
the
evenings
and
my
computer
room
faces
directly
to
the
turbine,
so
I
have
flicker
coming
through
my
windows.
All
during
the
switch
makes
more
difficult.
W
My
dining
room
also
faces
directly
to
the
turbine
so
evening.
Wheels
can
end
up
unpleasant
with
a
resulting
headache,
and
could
I
also
mention
in
conclusion
that
the
period
of
time
is
between
25
and
45
minutes,
and
that
takes
place
each
time
that
this
flicker
happens.
Also.
W
Could
I
also
imagine
your
the
ppsco
team
is
taken
from
the
parsons,
brick
and
off
information
which
the
whole
of
the
uk
covers
with
whales
have
suggested
that
not
only
the
mitigation
of
software
but
the
mitigation
of
trees
and
things
planted
to
prevent
the
flicker
on
houses
that
has
not
been
offered
anywhere
in
northern
ireland.
Thank
you,
chair.
D
Thank
you,
mr
pinter
and
you're.
Well,
within
your
time
and
bigger
nanny,
any
members
will
be
able
to
ask
questions
of
you.
So
if
you
want
to
stay
and
just
maybe
meet
yourself
and
then
we'll
bring
you
in
if
there's
any
questions
asked
to
yourself,
okay,
last
up
to
make
a
representation
of
gavin
smith
from
clyde
shanks
to
make
representation
as
the
agent
in
support
of
the
application.
D
X
However,
despite
the
application
being
in
with
the
planning
department
for
coming
up
to
three
years,
there
was
never
any
communication
from
them
relating
to
perceived
concerns
regarding
visual
impact.
The
only
time
that
this
was
raised
was
verbally
and
after
the
planning
committee
report
had
already
been
completed.
This
is
not
considered
good
practice,
as
it
did
not
give
the
applicant
any
opportunity
to
engage
directly
with
the
planning
department
to
present
the
supporting
case.
X
Having
read
through
the
committee
report,
it
is
noted
that
there
is
only
a
brief
mention
of
the
planning
history
with
regards
to
this
site,
which
has
a
significant
planning
history.
The
report
fails
the
outline
that
the
approved
setting
of
the
turbine
under
reference
q
2012023f
is
mostly
contained
within
this
2019
application
site.
X
Since
2013,
when
the
previous
application
was
approved,
there
has
been
no
change
in
planning
policy
with
regards
to
the
assessment
of
wind
turbine
applications.
The
location
of
the
site
within
the
specific
landscape
character
area
has
not
changed
and
the
turbine
dimensions
has
not
changed.
Furthermore,
the
siding
of
the
turbine
only
slightly
deviates
from
that
previously
approved,
and
I
draw
your
attention
to
the
site
plan.
X
We
would
ask
members
to
carefully
consider
the
submitted
site
plan
showing
the
approved
versus
that
in
situ
effectively
the
difference
is
minor.
Consequently,
the
assessment
of
this
application
should
be
afforded
the
significant
weight
of
the
planning
history
I.e,
the
previous
approval,
which
it
has
not
been
done
by
the
planning
department.
X
The
previous
committee
report
for
application
2012
concluded
that
the
construction
of
one
additional
wind
turbine
on
the
application
site
would
not
result
in
a
significantly
greater
visual
impact,
warranty
refusal
of
the
permission
on
the
basis
of
cumulative
impact
and
thereby
detriment
the
landscape
character.
The
report
goes
further,
stating
refusal
of
permission
on
visual
grounds
could
not
be
sustained,
given
that
the
approved
turbine
site
is
within
the
this
application
site.
There
is
no
change
in
turbine
dimensions.
There
is
no
change
in
landscape
character
area.
The
same
conclusion
must
be
made
I.e
to
approve.
X
X
D
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
smith,
and
you're
within
10
seconds
of
your
time
there.
So
thank
you
for
that
and
again
you'll
be
with
staying
with
us
to
answer
any
questions.
Members
may
have
members.
We
also
have
paul
mccullough
from
environmental
health
and
attention
status
room.
If
members
have
any
questions
in
terms
of
that
environmental
health
issues.
Okay,
members
are
there
any
questions
on
the
floor
at
this
stage,
counselor
mcclelland
you're
in
first.
H
Yes,
mr
chairman,
can
I
thank
you
for
bringing
me
in
and
thank
you
to
roshin
and
all
who
have
spoken
on
this
application
so
far
chairman.
Thank
you.
I
I
suppose
I
have
a
couple
or
three
questions
chair.
If
you
will
indulge
me,
the
very
first
one
is
around
the.
H
H
D
Okay,
okay,
I
think
thank
you.
Thank
you
country
clowns.
Please
ask
those
three
questions
to
rochin,
especially
around
the
topography
compared
to
the
original
application
number
of
turbines
on
the
two
or
three
mile
radius
and
then
just
further
info
on
the
shadow
flicker
machine
machine.
N
Thank
you,
chair
in
terms
of
the
topography
of
the
area
with
the
wider
area
is
drumlin
landscape,
okay,
but
in
terms
of
the
topography
and
the
difference
between
where
the
turbine
was
approved
and
where
the
turbine
is
located
now
well,
they're
15,
it's
roughly
15
meters
from
where
it
was
originally
approved,
just
within
the
same
field.
Now
the
new
turbine
is
outside
the
red
line
of
the
original
application
side,
which
is
why
a
retrospective
application
was
needed
in
the
first
place.
N
But
in
terms
of
that
the
height
difference
there
probably
isn't
a
significance,
different
significance
in
the
difference
of
the
height,
the
topography
of
actually
where
the
two
are
located.
But
you
know
the
the
approved
turbine
was
15
meters
away
from
here
and
say
outside
the
red
line
of
the
application
site,
and
that
was
why
the
new
application
was
required
in
terms
of
visual
impacts.
Obviously,
you've
asked
many.
There
are
in
the
wider
area.
Well,
certainly
whenever
in
driving
around
looking
at
the
the
turbine,
that
is
the
subject
of
the
application
side.
N
You
know
in
one
viewpoint,
so
there's
the
one
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
branch
of
road,
which
is
quite
easily
visible
from
a
number
of
viewpoints,
there's
two
further
off
the
rather
island
road
which
from
certain
viewpoints-
and
I
think,
even
in
some
of
the
the
photographs
you
might
have
seen
them-
you
can
see
them
in
a
distance
and
certainly
in
the
wider
landscape.
I
don't
think
I
could
give
you
a
figure,
but
there
are
others,
as
you
sort
of
do
a
30
360
degree
turn.
N
There
are
a
number
of
other
wind
turbines
because
of
the
because
of
the
nature
of
the
landscape.
So,
yes,
I
acknowledge
that
there
are
other
turbines
in
relation
to
shadow
flicker,
yes,
you're
quite
right.
Obviously
this
site
lies
outside,
as
I've
talked
about
what
we
would
normally
look
at
as
being
the
shadow
flicker
area
ten
times
diameter
130
degrees,
either
side
of
north,
but
a
shadow
flicker
report
was
done
and
the
shadow
flicker
report
determined
that
there
was
no
mitigation
required,
because
none
of
the
property
should
suffer
from
shadow
flicker.
N
Now,
in
response
to
that,
the
agent
has
supplied
us
with
details
of
a
unit
that
could
be
added
to
the
operating
system
of
the
turbine
and
what
it
does
is
it
can
protect
shadow
flicker
and
it
will
turn
the
turbine
off
at
those
times
when
shadow
flicker
is
predicted.
So
for
certain
periods
of
the
day
the
turbine
would
be
stopped
on
those
days
whenever
shadow
flicker
could
potentially
be
occurring.
N
Now
it
can
be
retrofitted,
so
it's
software,
as
I
say,
that's
integrated
into
the
control
system
and
they're
uniquely
configured
for
each
turbine,
so
this
parameter
set
now
if
members
were
minded
to
overturn
the
recommendation
to
refuse
we'd
have
to
think
carefully
about
the
conditions
that
we
would
attach
to
any
permission
as
to
when
it
would
be.
You
know,
put
onto
the
turbine
how
we
would
monitor
that
what
we
would
do
if
it
didn't
work.
N
So
I
think
there
would
be
a
bit
of
work
to
be
done
around
conditions
but,
as
I
say,
we
haven't
recommended
for
refusal
on
that
basis,
because
there
is
a
system
proposed
and
we
have
confirmation
from
someone
that
works
in
the
field
that
this
system
will
work
and
achieved
elsewhere.
So
I
hope
that
answers
your
questions.
D
Be
content
catch
my
clown
and
you
mentioned
you
know
anyone
who
else
would
want
to
come
in
or
not
in
terms
of
those
people
who
spoke
so
supposed
to
the
agent
until
they're
jacked
do
a
question
yeah.
So
lastly,
maybe
the
objective
first,
mr
painter,
so
painter
or
mr
painter,
in
terms
of
I
suppose,
maybe
it's
the
shadow
flicker,
but
maybe
mostly
applied
to
yourself
in
terms
of
a
bit
more
information
about
that.
I
suppose,
maybe
you
expand
on
what
you
presented
during
your
your
presentation.
D
Well,
mr
mclellan
was
councilman,
clown
was
asking
about.
You
know
the
shadow
flicker
impact.
So
if
you
could
outline
that,
I
suppose
in
your
view
on
it
just
rather.
W
Well,
as
you
say,
the
the
turbine
has
been
there
for
six
years,
we've
had
the
shadow
flicker
and
all
that
time.
Actually,
as
you
well
know
that
there
was
no
consultation
anywhere
in
the
area
with
any
residents
who
lived
in
the
area
with
the
original
planning
permission,
the
first
I
knew
that
there
was
a
a
turbine
in
the
area
was
when
I
saw
a
crane
lifting
the
mast
up
to
it.
That
was
fine.
I
mean
I'm
in
favor
of
wind
turbines.
I
take
the
reason
for
a
refusal.
Yes,
they
admit
they.
W
Yes,
they
they
do
look
different
on
the
landscape,
but
my
concern
is
with
the
shadow
flicker
my
home,
actually,
which
is
a
single
dwelling,
approximately
probably
500
meters,
from
the
thing,
the
turbine
I
I
have
the
flicker,
like
you
know,
for
between
25
and
45
minutes
considerably
more
than
the
recommended
time
now,
I
have
to
say
the
mitigation,
the
if
the
mitigation
is
available
on
works,
yes
well
and
good.
That
is
my
main
concern
with
it,
but
we
have
that
available
to
us
and
that
you
know
I'm
not.
W
They
ended
up
with
a
migraine
headache
on
a
number
of
occasions
every
year.
That
is
my
that's
my
main
concern.
The
the
flicker
is
is
the
problem
that
is
causing
me
issues
to
say
that
you
know
I
live
in
a
single
dwelling,
and
actually
I
didn't
send
video
evidence
as
I
could
have
sent,
actually
went
along
with
it,
but
I
can
show
video
evidence
actually
for
the
flicker
and
fields
right
to
the
rough
island,
road
which
is
over
a
kilometer
away.
D
Thanks,
thank
you,
mr
painter,
and
then
this
poses
some
similar
question
to
the
the
agent,
mr
smith,
just
in
terms
of
the
shadow
flicker,
I
suppose
the
the
measures
that
can
be
put
in
place
to
reduce
that.
I
know
it's
been
mentioned
and
seems
to
be
a
bit
of
discussion
here
about
it.
X
Well
thanks,
for
that
I
mean
I've
got
nothing
further
to
add
on
top
of
what
routine
said
out,
just
within
her
statement
there
you
know
the
turbine
can
be
mitigated
with
regards
to
shadow
flicker.
E
Just
for
a
point
of
clarification,
russian,
I
know
I
know
you're
you're
saying
that
the
original
approval
following
a
coach
mcclown's
question
that
they,
if
it
had
been
built
in
the
right
place,
this
location,
the
turbine,
were
no
bigger
and
and
therefore,
and
and
it's
the
same.
Spec
turbine
from
the
original
approval
and
looking
at
the
site
plan
in
detail.
John,
is
that
black
dotted
box
is
that
where
it
was
originally
approved
that
black
dot
just
for
clarification,
wasn't
it
just
first
and
then
I'll
go
on
a
request.
E
Okay,
my
question
goes,
I
suppose,
there's
two
or
three
aspects
to
it
and
and
it
sort
of
leads
on
from
what
councilman
mcclellan
was
going.
I
I'd
like
to
know
a
bit
more
from,
obviously
the
the
sort
of
if
in
the
room,
the
expert
paul
mccullough,
you
know
from
an
environmental
health
point
of
view
in
in
the
shadow
flicker
I'd
like
to
hear
from
him
in
relation
to
has
he
ever
experienced
these
mitigation
measures
that
have
been
you
know
implemented
in
these
situations?
E
I'd
like
to
hear
from
mr
painter.
Obviously
he
he's
the
main
objector
in
regards
the
shadow.
Flicker
does
does
that
that
sort
of
mitigation
measure
in
any
way
sort
of
you
know,
relay
his
his
issues.
You
know
that
he
is
experiencing
from
his
his
his
his
dwelling,
the
next
one
again,
I
suppose
it's
it's
more
up
to
to
to
to
roasheen
and
potentially
mr
smith,
and
that
is
mr
smith,
said
to
roshin
that
they
didn't
the
planning
authority.
Didn't
give.
E
You
know
enough
a
weight
to
the
the
previous
planning
history
as
in
material
consideration,
but
but
again
I
would
just
like
to
get
more
detail
on
that.
E
From
from
roshin,
why
that
was,
and
also
why
there's
no
fallback,
because,
like
again
without
having
the
original
approval
here,
we
can't
compare
the
two,
but
I
see
there's
a
laneway
and
there's
obviously
going
to
be
infrastructure
and
things
put
in
to
this
in
this
application,
which
would
apply
to
the
original
application,
which
would
be
material
consideration
in
relation
to
or
would
go
to,
the
heart
of
the
permission
of
the
original
permission.
E
D
Y
Yeah,
chair
apologies-
it
actually
probably
is
best
to
deal
with
by
the
planners,
and
that
case
environmental
health
actually
don't
deal
with
shadow
flicker
effect.
So
maybe
I'll
ask
russian
to
pick
that
up.
If
you
don't
mind.
N
Thank
you
chair,
yes,
shadow
flicker
is
dealt
with
by
the
officers
and
obviously
gone
into
it
in
a
wee
bit
of
detail.
Already
we
have
the
shadow
flicker
report,
the
shadow
flicker
reports.
You
know
states
there
should
be
no
impact.
However,
we
have
objectives
telling
us
there
is
impact.
So
what
we're
looking
at
now
is
mitigation.
What
I
would
say
is-
and
I
would
reiterate
this
pps18
does
allow
for
a
certain
amount
of
shadow
flicker.
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you
rushing.
So
the
next
question
be
to
mr
painter.
We
forgot
prisoners.
Mr
country
nicholson,
mr
penter's
views
on
these
potential
mitigation
matters
and
if
it
gives
them
some
relief
to
potentially
some
of
the
some
assurance
with
regards
to
how
the
shadow
flicker
could
be
monitored
and
dealt
with
mr
painter,
would
you
have
any
views
on
those
mitigations?
Yes?
Yes,
yes,
if.
W
He
is
a
much
closer
to
the
and
suffers
much
more
than
I
do
with
it
now
this
in
connection
country,
mcneil
could
speak,
maybe
a
little
bit
more
about
the
gentleman
concerns
wife
because
we
are
neighbors
and
that
is
to
say
we
don't
want
to
be
awkward
neighbors
with
anyone.
It's
just.
It
makes
life
difficult
both
for
myself
and
the
gentleman
represented
by
councillor
mcneil.
If
there
can
be
a
mitigation
put
in
well
and
good,
that
would
be
and
it
can
be
monitored
by
the
planners.
W
That
would
be
acceptable
and
I
think
that
will
probably
be
acceptable
to
my
neighbor
as
well.
Mr
rooney,
so
perhaps
maybe
councillor
mcneil
could
maybe
speak
a
little
bit
about
that
as
he
is
the
nearest
neighbor
to
the
particular
item.
But
certainly
I
say
nobody
wants
to
be
an
awkward
neighbor.
So
it's
it's
just
you
know
we
we
have
life
made
difficult
for
us
at
a
certain
time
of
the
year.
W
This
time
of
the
year
is
no
problem,
because,
as
you
appreciate
this,
the
light
of
the
sun
sets
in
a
totally
different
spot.
It's
in
the
evening
time
as
the
sun
sets
is
our
big
problem
when
we're
all
at
home,
and
we
like
to
enjoy
our
own
environment,
we
live
in
a
beautiful,
beautiful
area,
so
you
know
that's.
That
would
be
my
concern,
provided
the
medications
can
be
monitored
and
seen
to
be
operational.
W
D
Thank
you,
mr
pandering
justin's,
fairness
in
terms
of
I
know
mr
country
mcnay
you've
been
mentioned,
and
does
your
person
who
you're
representing
know
about
these
mitigations
or
have
they
been
discussed
in
any
conversations
you've
had
with
them.
T
Thanks
for
letting
me
back
and
again,
I'm
just
to
concur
with
the
previous
speaker,
there
a
as
I
said
in
my
few
words
on
the
last
two
or
three
lines,
the
health
and
wellbeing
of
mrs
elizabeth's
rooney
and
all
of
this,
and
I'm
sure
if
there
were
medications
put
in
place
to
prevent
this.
I
have
seen
the
videos
of
the
flickering
myself
now
and
that
words
can't
describe
it.
T
You
need
to
see
it
for
yourselves,
just
see
how
bad
it
is,
and
that
is
the
main
concern
that
is
very
annoying
for
them
and,
as
I
said,
they're
at
home
all
the
time
now
and
it's
not
as
if
that
they're
out
of
the
house
and
even
times
and
with
mrs
rooney's
health
issues
as
well.
That
is
the
most
important
thing
with
this.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you,
councilman,
mcnail
and
suppose
roshin
jen
missed
on
those
final
questions
that
councilor
nicholson
had
which
were
you're
the
weight
you
have
given
in
terms
of
the
plan
and
history.
A
bit
about
that.
Why
there's
no
fallback
position
and
there's
a
site
within
an
area
of
outstanding
natural
beauty?
Okay,.
N
First
of
all,
just
clarify
it's
not
within
the
aomb,
it's
two
kilometers
from
the
moon's
aomb,
but
you
can
see
the
warren's
aomb
in
the
background
from
certain
critical
viewpoints
in
relation
to
the
planning
history.
Look
we're
well
aware
that
there
was
a
previous
permission,
15
meters
from
this
site,
and
it
was
granted
back
in
2013
by
the
former
doa
and
we've
considered
that
it
is
obviously
a
material
consideration.
The
fact
that
there
was
a
previous
permission
here,
however,
that
permission
is
gone,
that
permission
was
was
not
implemented.
N
The
turbine
was
not
built
in
the
correct
place,
whether
that
was
by
error,
we're
not
sure,
but
it
wasn't
built
in
the
correct
place.
In
fact,
it's
completely
outside
the
red
line
of
the
original
application
site.
Therefore,
there
is
no
fallback.
Therefore,
we
have
to
look
at
this
application
on
its
own
mirror
in
its
own
right.
Does
it
comply
with
pps18?
N
Now,
yes,
like
I
said
the
plan,
history
is
a
consideration,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we
have
to
look
at
this
in
terms
of
the
visual
impact
of
it
as
well
as
all
the
other
issues
that
have
been
set
out
in
the
report
and
in
terms
of
the
visual
impact.
There
are
a
number
of
critical
viewpoints
with
this
turbine
is
a
stark
and
dominant
feature
where
it's
viewed
in
the
can.
You
know
with
the
aonb
behind
it.
It
impacts
on
the
the
views
of
sleeve
crew
and
officer's
opinion,
an
opposite
opinion.
N
It's
a
stark
and
dominant
feature.
There
are
views
of
sleep
group
where
you'll
be
adding
another
stark
and
dominant
feature
in
the
landscape,
and
for
those
reasons
we
don't
think
that
the
plan
on
history
is
of
determining
weight
and
that
we
don't
feel
that
it
outweighs
the
concerns
we
have
with
regard.
The
visual
impact
of
the
turbine
in
this
landscape.
E
No
yeah
yeah,
I
I
pretty
much
but
I
suppose
in
relation
to
the
the
the
origin,
you
know
the
original
approval
you
know
like
those
are
conditions
and
there
is
an
approval
that
had
to
be
implemented
to
say
that
work
had
commenced.
I
appreciate
this
built
in
the
wrong
place,
totally
see
that
and
and-
and
I
would
like
to
know-
if
there's
any
justification
of
reason
of
why
I'd
like
to
hear
from
mr
smith,
if
possible
from
his,
you
know
through
his
plan,
but
my
point
is
that
there
was
original
approval.
E
X
Yeah,
it's
just
to
re-emphasize
really.
You
know
the
planning
policy
hasn't
changed
since
that
original
approval
was
ground
up.
The
setting
is
a
minor
deviation
away
from
where
it
was
originally
approved.
Now
the
reason
for
the
minor
deviation
I've
been
told
by
the
applicant
is
based
on
advice
received
from
the
planning
department
at
the
time,
to
put
it
in
that
spot
where
it
is
now
because
it
was
considered
to
be
a
more
acceptable
spot
now.
X
Obviously,
that's
a
case
of
he
said
she
said,
but
that's
basically,
where
it
is,
I
mean
no
one
goes
out
of
their
way
to
put
a
turbine
outside
of
the
red
line
by
such
a
minor
difference.
X
X
D
No
lights
on
for
any
other
questions,
loads
of
lights
on
coming
on,
I'd
asked,
damian
and
russian
to
switch
theirs
off
just
after
some
questions
from
myself,
where
you
sort
of
asked
the
first
one,
mr
smith,
just
why
I
was
on
the
wrong
side.
D
N
D
Thank
you,
alderman
anderson.
I
I
thank
you
chairman,
thanks
to
everyone.
Who's
extended
this
afternoon
at
a
couple
of
points.
Facial
impact
is
that
is
the
issue
here,
but
maybe
could
I
ask
roshin
there's
I
think
I
picked
up
bradley
at
those
in
the
immediate
sunday
or
around
that
there's
six
in
total
wind
turbines.
I
I
would
just
had
to
get
my
own
head
around
this.
Is
this
turbine
or
debating
more
or
less
visually,
impacting
than
the
others?
Is
that
sitting
out,
in
particular
against
the
other
five
and
we're
told
there's
no
change
in
policy
and
the
other
question
would
be
15
meters
outside
the
red
line?
Could
I
ask
rogen
if
not
turbine
was
sighted
inside
the
red
line?
N
In
relation
to
the
first
question,
I
think
it
was:
does
it
visually
impact
more
than
the
others
that
you
can
view
in
the
vicinity?
I
think
the
answer
to
that
is.
It
depends
where
you
view
it
from.
Certainly
there
are
views
where
you
can
see
this
in
conjunction
with
the
one
and
the
other
one
on
the
the
opposite
side
of
the
ground,
where
it
is
more
visually
prominent,
but
equally
there
are
views,
particularly
from
the
steve
naboli
road
and
the
rather
island
road
and
traveling
along
them.
N
Where
this
this
termite
sits
on
top
of
the
ridgeline.
With
no
backdrop,
yes,
there's
views
of
the
other
turbine,
but
this
one
is
much
more
visually
prominent,
so
I
think
you
know
it
depends
on
where
you
view
it
from,
but
there
are
viewpoints
where.
Yes,
this
is
more
visually
prominent
than
the
others.
N
In
relation
to
the
second
question,
I
think
it
was
if
it
was
built
in
the
correct
place.
Would
visual
impact
still
be
an
issue?
If
it
had
been
built
in
the
correct
place,
then
it
would
be
a
valid
permission.
There's
nothing.
We
could
do
about
it.
It
would
be
there.
It
would
be,
it
would
have
been
grounded
and
it
would
be
built
in
accordance
with
approved
plans,
and
I
think
we
would
have
to
to
live
with
it.
D
Okay,
so
suppose
that
the
two
questions
I
have
just
at
the
present
time
are-
and
it's
been
mentioned
by
a
couple
of
people-
that
the
legislation
has-
it
hasn't
changed
since
the
appraisal
in
2013.
D
So
I'm
just
want
to
understand
at
what
point
along
those
three
years.
Was
it
decided
that
the
visual
that
made
the
impact
wasn't
was
a
no
and
why
was
not
not
given
three
or
two
years
ago,
because
the
views
there
are
unchanged
in
all
of
that
time.
So
those
two
questions,
I
guess
just
on
the
view
on
2013
and
what's
changed
following
the
recommendation
from
yourself
and
that
just
this
whole,
when
was
the
decision
on
visual
media
impact.
D
N
N
Obviously,
we've
got
the
spps,
which
now
talks
about
giving
appropriate
weight
to
the
wider
environmental,
economic
and
social
benefits
as
opposed
to
significant
weight,
but
generally
the
platinum
policy
policy
is
the
same
as
when
the
original
2013
permission
was
granted
retrospective.
In
about
2013
permission,
you
know
in
terms
of
the
visual
impact
we
would
say.
Maybe
you
know
it
was
the
wrong
decision.
The
only
difference
now
is
we
have
the
turbine
empties.
We
can
see
it.
We
can
assess
the
visual
impact
of
it
with
it
actually
in
situ.
N
At
that
time
it
wouldn't
have
been
there,
and
so
why
was
this
consideration
not
taken
two
or
three
years
ago?
Well,
look.
We
had
the
application
in
and
we
were
working
through
the
application.
There
was
a
number
of
issues
with
it,
and
noise
was
raised
as
an
issue.
There
were,
I
think
three
noise
reports
done
so
we
were
working
through
those
issues.
There
was
a
shadow
flicker
report
done
and
there
was
a
red
kite
survey.
Vantage
point:
sorry
vantage
point
survey
submitted
in
terms
of
the
impact
on
birds.
N
Those
all
had
to
be
asked
for
submitted,
assessed,
gone
out
to
consultation,
so
there's
a
process.
We
were
going
through
to
deal
with
all
the
issues
that
were
raised
as
part
of
the
planning
application
process
and
I
suppose
it
was
only
fairly
recently
where
we
were
actually
in
a
point
where
we
could
sit
down
and
discuss
it
like
this.
I
mean
this.
N
Is
this
it's
a
finally
balanced
decision
here
because
we're
very
aware
of
the
plan
in
history
here
we're
very
aware
that
the
planning
policy
hasn't
changed
but,
as
I
said
to
you
before,
we
have
to
there's
no
fallback
position
here.
We
have
to
look
at
this
application.
Does
it
comply
with
pps18
are?
Am
I
satisfied,
or
are
we
satisfied,
standing
up
and
saying
that
this
does
not
impact
on
the
visual
impact
of
the
area?
D
D
Thank
you,
russian
country,
mcnally.
Z
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
just
listening
to
the
be
it
you
know.
I
think
if
we
we
are
minded
to
overturn
this
recommendation.
You
know
I
do
agree
with
and
the
need
for
mitigation
measures
to
address.
You
know
some
of
those
issues
that
objector
had,
but
I
suppose
my
question
is
slightly
off
what
we've
been
talking
about,
and
that
is
just
with
the
dress
address
that
they're
rushing
russian.
Z
Was
there
any
weight
given
to
you
know
the
effect
for
refusing
this
and
turbine
what
what
effect
would
that
have
on
the
local
farming
business
and
the
reason
I'm
bringing
this
up
is
just
that.
You
know
we
have
to
burn
mind
the
climate
change
build
and
how
farmers
are
going
to
be
asked
very
shortly
to
drastically
reduce
their
emissions.
Z
N
Sorry,
sorry,
you
know,
as
I've
said
you,
the
wider
environmental,
economic
and
social
impacts
of
this
are
material
considerations
and
it's
up
to
us
to
give
appropriate
weight.
And,
yes,
that's
all
in
the
planning,
balance
and
exercise.
We
consider
all
of
that
now
in
terms
of
the
the
the
impact
that
it
has
on
the
applicant
in
terms
of
finances.
That
was
probably
not
quantified,
but
I
mean
it's
a
material
consideration.
It's
something
we've
taken
into
account,
however,
you
know
like
I
keep
saying.
D
G
Char
chart
look
at
just
my
baby
to
support
what
rushing
said
in
relation
to
the
policy
position.
There
has
been
a
material,
an
important
material
change
in
policy
between
when
the
decision
was
taken
by
doe
in
2013
to
approve
this
and
what
we're
looking
at
today.
As
roshin
said,
the
strategic
planning
policy
statement
which
came
in
2015,
actually
tells
us
to
put
appropriate
weight
on
social
and
economic
factors
and
environmental
factors.
G
Previously,
when
the
doa
took
the
decision
was
to
put
significant
weight
on
other
factors
like
the
ergonomic
potential
economic
benefits,
potential
social
benefits
associated
with
wind
turbine
developments
or
wind
energy
developments.
G
So
there
has
been
a
significant
change
in
policy.
We're
now
been
told
to
move
from
significant
weight
to
appropriate
weight,
and
I
think
that
is
important
and
what
officers
have
done
here
is
notwithstanding
the
decision
taken
by
doi.
That
was
their
decision.
We
made
a
fresh
assessment
of
this
as
council
officers
in
the
light
of
current
policy.
G
Notwithstanding
the
planning
background
enforcement
background.
In
our
opinion,
this
is
having
a
very
unacceptable
and
adverse
impact
on
the
landscape.
Members
could
see
that
from
the
photographs,
it's
very
clear
how
stark
this
is
in
the
landscape,
and
that
is
the
reason
balance
on
balance,
having
regarded
all
the
factors
involved,
as
russians
pointed
out.
On
balance,
we
decided
the
visual
impact
was
entirely
unacceptable,
and
that
is
why
we've
moved
to
the
recommendation
that
we
have
so
we
just
wanted
to
try
and
make
that
point
to
try
and
clarify
and
support
what
russians
already
said.
D
Thank
you,
damian
industrial
darling
on
that
that's.
Why
was
the
recommendation
then,
to
recommended
appraisal
for
this
application
at
the
pre-planning
pre-meeting
on
monday,
and
then
what
changed
with
regards
to
the
officer's
assessment?
Was
it
a
better
view
of
the
whole
situation
or
what
changed
just
last
week
to
change
the
recommendation?
Thank
you.
Damien.
G
But
we've
had
an
opportunity
to
review
our
position
and
looking
at
it
in
the
round,
having
regard
in
particular
to
the
visual
impact
that
this
would
have,
and
that
is
where
officers
have
moved
to
to
put
our
determining
on
that
particular
issue.
Having
regard
to
the
current
policy,
which
is
about,
has
moved
from
significant
weight
to
social
and
economic
fighters
too.
Appropriately.
G
Now,
when
you
look
at
the
social
economic
environmental
issues
and
decide
where
to
place
your
weight
on
this
notwithstanding
theory's
position,
our
position
is
this
would
cause
demonstrable
harm.
Unacceptable
adverse
impact
on
the
environment
not
outweighs
an
officer's
opinion,
any
potential
social
and
economic
benefits
that
might
go
with
this
turbine
development.
G
So
yes
sure
there
was
a
prelim
review,
but
we,
it
was
a
very
much
premium
review
and
we
have
moved
from
that.
Having
regard
to
looking
at
all
the
fighters
in
the
round
and
on
balance
coming
down
on
the
environmental
side,.
J
I
think
it
is
something
I
would
begin
to
see,
and
that
is
the
economic
element
of
this
in
terms
of
what
it
would
ultimately
mean
to
run
with
the
officer's
recommendation,
which
I'm
assuming
then
would
ultimately
be
the
removal
of
the
structure
and
based
on
that
and
we'll
be
keen
to
understand,
just
I'm
pretty
certain
there's,
probably
rock
payments
on
the
or
some
type
of
payment
system
on
the
turbine
in
terms
of
the
parts
generated
and
that's
potentially
through
another
body
as
well,
and
so
we'll
be
keen
to
have
some
detail
around
that
before
making
a
further
decision
on
a
wider
theme.
J
I
know
from
the
department
of
economies
perspective
in
terms
of
energy
from
renewable
sources
that
has
to
jump
to
70
but
2030.
J
So
that's
a
huge
jump
and
there
will
be
incentive
schemes
brought
forward
under
that
which,
in
my
opinion,
will
then
and
well
by
nature.
It
will
incentivize
energy
from
renewable
sources
of
whatever
technology
is
available
from
today
onwards
or
from
whenever
this
scheme
of
assistance
becomes
available,
and
that's
per
one
of
the
minister's
answers
in
the
assembly
this
week.
So
from
that
aspect,
we're
going
to
be
seeing
a
lot
more.
S
J
You
know
renewable
technologies
that,
and
we
can't,
I
suppose,
afford
to
slip
and
what
the
term
is
nimbyism
and
turn
it
on
my
backyard
and
that's
something
we
need
to
be
really
careful
about.
I
suppose,
as
a
council,
where
our
policy
will
point
us
in
terms
of
renewables,
counselor
mcnally
has
mentioned
the
claim
change
bill,
and
that
has
been
against
all
advice
and
from
the
uk,
climate
change
committee
and
other
areas
has
been
pushed.
You
know
considerably
much
further.
S
J
So
that's
going
to
accelerate
the
seriousness
of
this
even
more
and
then,
as
a
council,
we're
potentially
enforcing
someone
to
remove
their
wind
turbine,
which
has
been
there
in
january
of
the
car
for
some
time,
albeit
one
corner
of
it,
as
I'd
say
the
red
line.
So
that's
something
to
be
just
conscious
of,
but
apart
from
that,
I
think
my
main
concern
at
this
point
would
be
you
know
the
issue
of
the
payments
on
that.
That's
potentially
attracting
you
know,
buy
this
turbine
what
that
means
for
the
person.
J
I
know
it's
been
alluded
to
in
terms
of
the
the
farm
business,
but
I
would
be
keen
to
see
you
know
the
actual
meeting
the
bone
of
what
doesn't
mean
you
know
carrying
forward
the
decision
of
the
plan
officer
in
this
regard.
If
we
move
to
that
decision,
I'm
not
suggesting
we
do
or
we
don't
I'm
just.
I
would
like
to
see
the
meet
on
the
bone.
J
A
lot
before
would
consider
a
decision
to
be
more
comfortable
with
that
and,
as
I
said,
there's
more
like
counselor
sandwiches
said
he'd
been
to
there
and
there's
a
lot
more
turbines
in
the
general
facility.
So
just
my
thoughts
at
this
point.
Thanks.
D
Thank
you,
alderman
wilson.
Would
you
have
any
details
of
those
economic
consequences
at
this
at
this
stage?
You
know
that
would
be
up
for
rushing
or
damien
or
the
agent
to
outline
what
the
impact
would
be.
Maybe
we'll
ask
the
agent
first
just
generally
what
this
economic
impact
would
be
for
for
the
the
sonar
family.
Mr
smith,.
X
I
don't
have
exact
figures
chair,
but
I
mean
obviously
the
the
removal
of
the
turbine
would
cause
significant
financial
difficulty
for
what
is
a
farming
business.
This
would
not
only
be
the
cost
of
removal
of
the
turbine
and
the
implications
for
that,
but
obviously
the
lost
rock
payments
as
well.
So
I
mean,
like
I
said
before
this
is
not
a
large
scale,
wind
turbine
operating
company
that
could
maybe
absorb
costs.
X
Far
from
it.
You
know
this
is
a
farming
business
who
relies
on
the
wind
generation
income
since
to
subsidize
the
farming
industry.
So
that's
all
I
can
say
about
that.
One
fruit.
N
J
Yeah,
no,
it's
just
the
point
I
mean
in
terms
of
you
know
it's
an
obvious
process
to
follow.
If
that
was
the
case,
and
you
know
demands
made
to
remove
it,
it's
not
something
that
is
prolifically
done
by
council
generally,
because
I
knew
from
various
other
engagements
with
planners
and
particularly
from
enforcement's
perspective.
It's
long
drawn
out
process
and
there's
not
too
many
people
have
been
chucked
out
of
their
homes
and
their
homes
demolished.
J
You
know,
there's
all
in
my
view,
and
I've
been
you
know
even
before
committee,
but
on
both
sides
of
the
debates
and
this
before
even
rpa
kicked
in.
You
know
where
you
think
you
know
that's
a
straightforward
case:
it's
not
there's
lots
of
mitigation
involved
in
that
and
it's
very
much
the
last
resort.
J
But
again
that's
just
another.
Another
comment.
E
Yeah,
chairman,
look:
if
there's
no
more
questions
I'll,
let
you
in
illegal.
I
have
a
legal
opinion
on
something
german.
D
D
Okay,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
at
this
point
I
am
going
to
move
all
those
members
of
the
public
and
counselors
who
are
attending
the
planning
and
regulatory
services.
Midi
vows
same
to
a
zoom
wedding
ring
who's
using
the
dial-in
service
will
be
placed
on
hold,
and
anyone
in
attendance
in
the
chamber
will
be
asked
to
leave
the
room
to
enable
the
committee
to
obtain
legal
advice
from
speaker
advisor.
Any
member
of
committee
has
spoken
as
a
supporter.
Objector
to
application
under
consideration
will
also
be
asked
to
leave
the
room.
D
The
advice
provided
will
relate
only
to
legal
matters,
no
discussion
of
the
merits
of
the
planning
application
now
before
it
will
take
place
until
the
public
element
of
the
mating
resumes
and
you
have
been
moved
back
to
the
meeting
or
taken
off
hold
any
legal
advice
provided
is
confidential.
All
members
of
the
committee
who
remain
are
obliged
to
preserve
that
confidentiality.
D
D
B
Q
L
I
I
R
Q
Q
D
D
D
Yeah,
oh
okay,
members
see
that
damn
we're
all
back
in
bar.
I
think
mr
pinter's
dropped
off
we're
just
trying
to
clarify
if
he's
left
on
his
own
doing
well
and
we're
back
in
the
live
feed.
Okay,
members,
we're
back
plenty
any
questions
you
have.
D
M
Yes
sure,
I'm
just
disappointed
that
it's
actually
at
this
committee
and
it's
all
down
to
he
said
that
she
said
that
it
should
be
put
in
that
place
instead
of
the
old
place
and
it's
needless
work
on
the
officers
on
this
part,
because
it
was
put
in
the
wrong
place
in
the
future
and
that
we
have
to
make
a
decision
on
this,
and
a
message
should
be
sent
out
from
this.
M
E
Yeah
thanks
sharon
and
obviously
what
country
duffy
said
there.
Obviously
I
think
we
all
agree
with
that.
You
know
it'll
make
our
life
a
lot
easier.
If
people
would
build
us
further
what
they
get
permission
for,
but
look,
I
suppose
the
old
saying
is
we
are
we
are
and
look
I
I'm
having.
Definitely
this
one
it.
It
is
a
balance
and
you
know.
E
Obviously,
we've
talked
about
shadow
flicker
and
software,
and
things
like
that
and
we've
talked
about
the
economic
side
of
the
impact
of
it,
with
new
information
on
that
and
a
appreciate
all
what
the
officers
can
do
in
relation
to
photographs.
So,
like
again,
I
don't
know
the
area
and
again,
if
we're
gonna,
you
know,
hang
out
and
visual
impact.
E
You
know
I
I
I
would
be
sort
of
sort
of
swimming
towards
going
to
see
it
myself
chair
to
be
honest
with
you
just
to
see
it
to
compare
it
to
others
and
and
things
like
that,
to
make
a
real,
because
I
just
think
there's
there's
it's
too
much
of
a
balance
here
that
we
we
we
we
don't
have
all
the
information.
I
don't
think
at
this.
This
current
time,
but
looking
with
I'm
convinced
to
hear
what
other
members
think
on
the
matter,
thank
you,
john.
D
F
Thank
you
chair
for
letting
me
in
and
just
my
thoughts
on
it
look.
You
know
the
reason
for
this
refusal
is
it's
an
unacceptable
adverse
impact
on
the
visual
immunity
and
landscape
character
of
the
area.
So
you
know
the
stuff
about
the
flicker
and
things
like
that
there
we
did
discuss
something
remedy,
but
that's
not
the
reason
for
refusal.
F
It
is
this
unacceptable
adverse
impact
and
any
decision
we
make
on
this.
You
know
going
forward
as
a
planning
committee,
you
know
we'll
have
to
refer
back
to
any
decision
we
make
tonight
and
hey
like
councillor
nicholson.
You
know
this
is
all
about
visual
and
you
can't
really
see
everything
from
the
pictures
on
the
new
we're,
not
the
biggest
fans
of
state
visits,
but
well,
I'm
not
anywhere,
but
I
think
in
in
certain
cases
they
are
essential.
F
You
know,
because
I
think,
with
this
one,
seeing
seeing
it
in
in
real
time
and
being
there
will
give
us
a
better
idea
of
what
the
officers
seen
when
they're
right
and
said,
because
officers
were
out
of
sight
and
we
haven't
so
you
know
I'm
not
making
that
proposing
nightshare.
I
know
we're
only
in
the
discussion
is,
but
I
do
agree.
You
know.
The
reason
we're
here
is
that
this
then
is
15
meters
from
where
it
should
be
on
15
meters
in
plan
is,
is,
is
not
a
considerable
distance.
F
You
know
if
somebody
had
about
some
15
meters
closer
away,
how
sad
it
should
have
been.
There
would
have
been
issues,
so
you
know-
and
I
don't
think
we've
got
the
bottom
of
that
way.
It
was
built
there
that
the
agent
wasn't
like
able
to
explain
that
to
counselor
nicholson's
questions,
so
you
know
we
are
here
not
because
of
our
own
doing,
but
because
of
somebody
else's,
so
you
know
that's
where
I
sort
of
stand
on
it
sure.
Thank
you.
J
Yeah
just
was
moving
the
same
opinion
in
terms
of
the
visuality
of
it
it's
hard
to
gauge,
and
even
you
know
the
images
that
we've
seen
from
a
distance.
It's
it's
a
structure
that
you
probably
need
to
see
and
it's
in
its
real
time
location.
I
suppose
something
else.
I'm
thinking
about
it's
just
you
know
in
in
the
report,
page
14,
you
know
it
says
it's
important
to
appreciate
the
northern.
Ireland's
40
percent
target
for
use
of
renewable
energy
sources
has
been
met
and
exceeded.
J
I
suppose
it's
just
to
point
out
that
that's
now
going
forward
as
per
most
of
her
commonly
used
and
work
on
that
it's
now
to
be
70
but
20
30.,
and
I
don't
know
if
that
can
be
included
in
the
reporter
if
it's
a
consideration,
but
I
suppose
it's
saturday
the
course
of
travel
from
here
on,
but
the
other
point
was
referred
to
earlier
in
terms
of
economics.
J
Well,
nothing
has
been
provided.
I
think,
according
to
the
report,
I
think
it's
maybe
worth
pursuing.
If
we're
going
to
say
visit
or
proposing
that
or
you
know,
members
are
of
the
view
of
that,
is
there
a
possibility,
then,
within
not
time
for
him
to
get
away,
but
I'm
making
the
bone
in
terms
of
the
economics
associated
with
just
for
a
full
understanding
of
it
not
to
obviously
preempt
anything
but
just
to
have
for
I
would
be
keen
just
to
see
it.
J
You
know
what
what
it
means-
and
you
know
maybe
some
figures
around
generation
on
that
thanks.
D
Thank
you,
aldman
wilson,
not
not
seeing
any
other
lights
on
it's.
You
know
they
always
start
with
the
most
complex
applications.
First
on
the
planet,
maintenance
and
there's
a
certain
example
of
that
there's.
So
many
different
things
to
consider
and
as
I've
been
said
by
members
of
the
visual
element,
here's
the
key
and
it
does
well.
I
think
we'll
need
to
go
out
and
see
it.
I
think
that's
that
is
maybe,
but
do
you
mean
you've
got
your
light
on
and
there
were
members
decision
here.
G
Sure
I
think
I'm
getting
in
very
quickly
here.
I
think
the
legal
advisor
actually
would
wish
to
go
in
the
committee
if
possible,
for
for
some
advice.
Members
before
you
do
me
again
any
kind
of
decision
just
gauging
up
why
the
discussion's
going
here.
It
might
be
useful
to
hear
some
legal
advice
before
it
goes
any
further.
If
I
could
suggest
thanks
chair.
D
Well,
we're
only
we're
only
able
to
go
in
the
legal
advice
if
there's
a
proposer
and
a
seconder
councillor
mcnally
proposed
councillor
nicholson.
Second,
okay,
I
need
to
read,
I
don't
think
again.
D
Okay,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
at
this
point
I'm
going
to
move
all
those
members
of
the
public
encounters
who
are
attending
the
planning
and
regulatory
service
committee
vows
into
zoom
waiting
room.
Those
using
the
dial-in
service
will
be
placed
on
hold
on
anyone
in
attendance,
and
the
chamber
will
be
asked
to
leave
the
room
to
enable
the
committee
to
obtain
legal
advice
from
its
legal
advisor
any
member
of
the
committee
who
has
spoken
or
supported
our
objective
to
this
application
under
consideration.
D
We
also
asked
the
labour
room
advice,
provided
will
be
laid
only
to
legal
matters
and
no
discussion
of
the
merits
of
the
planning
application
now
before
it
will
take
place
until
the
public
element
of
the
meeting
resumes
and
you
have
been
moved
back
into
the
meeting
and
taken
up
hold.
Only
legal
advice
providers,
confidential
law,
members
of
the
mother,
human
men
are
obliged
to
preserve
that
confidentiality.
D
Q
Q
E
E
Q
E
Y
Q
Q
B
D
D
J
Yeah
just
be
a
stubborn,
what
we've?
What
we've
heard
and
what
we've
learned
this
evening
and
based
on
the
fact
that
no
information
was
provided
in
terms
of
the
economics
of
the
application
and
I'll
just
read
out.
I
think
it's
number
page
414
and
the
application
the
applicant
did
not
provide
any
information
in
their
supporting
report
regarding
the
number
of
jobs
that
have
been
created,
either
directly
or
indirectly,
by
the
turbine
development.
J
For
that
reason,
officers
cannot
give
any
determining
to
that
issue,
and
it
would
be
my
view
that
we,
you
know
it
is
my
personal
view
that
as
an
individual
on
this
committee,
that
I
would
like
to
see
that
information
and
I
would
propose
that
we
allow
the
applicant
a
period
of
time
to
bring
that
information
to
the
committee
in
order
that
determining
which
could
be
given
to
it
and
that's
simply
a
proposal,
and
it's
simply
to
enable
me
to
come
to
a
more
fuller
knowledge
of
the
of
the
application
and
the
decision
that
will
be
due
to
be
taken
by
myself
as
an
individual.
D
Okay
proposal
there
and
do
have
a
couple
of
lights
on
here
counter
next.
E
Yeah
john,
how
about
a
second
a
proposal?
Do
you
think,
there's
there's
additional
information
required
in
relation
to
the
social,
economic,
environmental
aspect
of
this
application,
which
I
think
that
would
be
beneficial
for
the
latest
committee
to
to
reach
a
decision.
So
I'm
hoping
a
second
I'll.
Thank
you.
D
J
I
can
tell
this
stage
that
it
is
limited
to
that
aspect
and
I
would
say
that
if
I
fail,
you
know
feel
the
need
for
a
side
vision.
I
won't
hesitate
to
make.
I
propose
a
little
further
and
meet
another
committee.
D
To
be
honest,
given
the
given
the
weight
of
the
visual
immunity
we're
talking
about
here,
I
wouldn't
mind
the
site
to
visit
in
the
interim,
although
we
could
wait
till
the
economics
come
back
and
and
then
we'll
see
where
we're
at,
but
I
think
with
a
proposal
there
from
alderman
wilson.
Happy
to
you
know,
support
it,
but
that's
just
my
view
on
this
and
the
other
proposals
on
the
floors.
Members.
D
D
Okay,
just
like
to
thank
everyone
who
spoke
in
that
application.
Okay,
members,
it's
25
past
six,
it's
gonna
stop!
For
a
short
time
till
we
get
some
refreshments
here,
we'll
agree
to
come
back
at
a
quarter
to
seven,
so
that's
6,
45,
some
22
minutes
time.
Members
and
class
of
the
live
phase
b
pause
in
the
interim.
D
D
E
D
You
country
nixon,
so
cancer
next
to
stepping
out
of
the
room.
Can
I
we
should
say,
and
the
dandelion
report
has
been
circulated,
but
first
off
we're
going
to
start
with
the
hand
over
the
trudy
chaplain,
the
senior
planning
officer
to
present
their
report
and
powerpoint
presentation.
They,
you
ready.
AA
Thank
you
chair.
This
application
seeks
outline
approval
for
an
infield
dwelling
in
garage,
and
it's
before
you
this
evening
has
been
called
in
by
alderman
spears
following
publication
of
the
agenda
for
this
meeting,
the
agent
made
a
written
representation
through
democratic
services.
This
has
been
considered
by
officers.
An
addendum
to
the
report
has
been
circulated
in
advance
of
this
meeting
policy.
Ctyh
of
pps21
allows
for
the
development
of
a
small
gap
site
sufficient
only
to
accommodate
up
to
maximum
tree
houses
within
an
otherwise
substantial
and
continuously
built
up.
AA
Frontage
c2y8
defines
a
substantial
and
built
up
frontage
as
one
containing
a
minimum
of
three
buildings
along
a
road
frontage
officers
are
the
opinion
that
number
62
and
64
dairy
scholar,
broad
and
their
associated
garages
have
frontages
to
onto
the
road.
However,
the
applicant
is
relying
on
the
remains
of
a
redundant
poultry
shed
to
the
north
of
the
site
to
complete
the
substantial
and
continuously
built
up
frontage
officers.
AA
Members
are
advised
that
this
committee
refused
a
similar
application
for
an
infill
dwelling
at
melbourne
fort
road.
For
this
same
reason,
and
that
this
decision
was
appealing
to
the
plan
on
the
peace
commission,
the
commissioner,
in
his
decision,
agreed
with
this
committee
and
commented
for
the
purposes
of
policy
cty.
Yet
I
attribute
the
word
building
to
its
everyday
meaning
and
conclude
that
the
ruins
do
not
constitute
a
building
for
the
purposes
of
planning
policy.
AA
With
regard
to
this
application,
consultation
responses
were
favorable
and
there
are
no
representations
received
either
in
support
or
objecting
to
the
proposal.
Officers
recommend
that
the
committee
refuse
the
application
for
the
reason
set
out
and
the
report,
and
I
will
take
you
through
the
presentation.
AA
So
this
is
our
general
location.
Pardon
me
we're
right
at
the
the
edge
of
our
district
up
towards
the
the
border
with
true
next
slide.
Please.
So
this
is
our
application
site.
You'll
see
number
62
and
64
dairy
scallop
road,
our
application
site,
the
outline
to
the
rear.
There
is
a
set
of
foundations
that
are
in
place,
and
then
we
have
our
our
building.
That
is
the
reason
for
the
reason
for
it
not
being
a
continuously
built
up
frontage
to
the
north.
AA
Now
these
photographs,
these
are
aerial
photography
that
go
back
a
number
of
years
and
show
the
evolution
of
the
site
and
the
surroundings.
So
back
in
april
2007
we
had
the
two
poultry
houses.
We
didn't
have
number
64
and
we
didn't
have
the
foundations
to
the
rear,
you'll
see
by
2010,
number
64
had
been
built
and
the
foundations
were
in
place
for
the
one
to
the
north.
AA
Alpha
next
slide,
please
so
by
the
stage
then
june
2013
there
there
wasn't
a
great
deal
of
change,
but
by
may
2016
you
can
see
that
the
building
closest
to
the
road
had
started
to
be
demolished,
and
you
can
see
some
damage
then
to
the
one
to
the
west
of
it.
Next
slide,
please.
So
this
is
our
most
recent
aerial
photograph.
AA
You
can
see
that
the
bulk
of
the
building
to
the
road
has
gone.
Half
of
the
building
to
the
rear
has
gone,
and
you
can
see
that
there's
the
beginnings
of
some
damage
to
the
roof
in
that
one
next
slide,
please.
So
these
photographs
are
shown,
you've
got
number
62
and
number
64
and
that
there
are
frontages
onto
the
road
next
slide.
Please
this
is
the
site
frontage.
So
this
is
us
looking
from
the
road
straight
into
the
site,
as
you
can
see,
there
is
quite
a
high
road
verge
there
next
slide,
please.
AA
This
is
taken
slightly
further
along
looking
back.
You
can
see
number
62
and
64
to
the
right
of
your
screen.
There
next
slide
then,
and
then
this
is
literally
just
the
same
area.
Only
inside
the
site
looking
back
down
next
slide,
so
this
is,
admittedly
a
google
street
view
photo.
I
give
a
better
representation
than
the
ones
we've
taken
out
inside.
AA
It
was
taken
in
july
21,
so
you
can
see
the
remains
of
the
poultry
house
to
the
east
on
that
particular
photograph,
and
if
we
move
to
the
next
one,
these
ones
were
taken
at
the
initial
site,
inspection
on
the
6th
of
august.
AA
So
we've
got
the
initial
portrait
house
to
the
east
of
the
the
site
and
then
the
one
that
we
are
considering
is
in
behind
it
next
slide,
please
so
again,
these
are
the
ones
that
were
taken
on
the
6th
of
august,
as
you
can
see
that
at
that
point
they
were
broadly
in
rooms.
Next
slide,
please.
AA
This
was
submitted
by
the
agent
during
the
processing
of
the
application
and
as
part
of
the
letter
to
democratic
services,
and
this
is
a
picture
that
was
taken
at
the
time
that
the
application
was
submitted
to
us
now,
there's
no
date
as
to
when
it
was
taken,
but
it
advised
us
this
was
the
state
of
the
building.
At
the
time,
the
application
was
submitted
next
slide.
AA
Please
so
again,
these
are
google
street
view
photographs
just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
what
had
been
on
the
site,
so
the
one
on
the
bottom
was
taken
back
in
may
11
and
shows
the
two
poultry
houses
fully
intact,
and
the
one
above
then,
is
taken
from
the
same
place
in
july
21.
It
shows
you
that
the
both
of
them
are
in
arena.
State
next
slide,
please.
AA
So
these
again
are
shown
on
the
remains
of
the
buildings
to
to
the
north
of
our
application
site.
Next
slide,
please!
AA
So
again,
this
is
the
building
or
the
structure
that
the
applicant
contains
is
a
building
for
the
purposes
of
the
policy.
AA
Next
slide,
please
and
again
from
a
different
angle,
and
there
should
be
another
one,
no
concept
plan,
then
this
our
concept
plan
shows
how
the
they
would
propose
to
create
the
site
using
that
building
as
technically
their
their
big
end
and
the
substantial
incontendency
built
up
frontage
next
slide.
Please,
then
this
is
our
our
first
refusal.
As
you
can
see,
it
is
it's
a
larger
site
than
what
we're
considering
now,
because
it
takes
into
consideration
both
poultry
houses,
and
that
was
refused
that
2003
application.
AA
The
next
slide
please-
and
this
was
a
2004
version
again
it
took
into
account
the
two
poultry
houses
and
actually
sought
to
replace
those
with
a
drill
and
again
it
was
refused,
and
then
the
last
one
shows
the
most
recent
one
which
was
determined
by
the
council
but
didn't
come
before
the
planning
committee
and
again
it
took
into
account
the
two
poultry
houses
and
again
wanted
an
application
for
a
dwell
or
not
and
again
was
refused,
and
that
should
be
me.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
sure.
D
Okay,
thanks.
Thank
you,
trudy,
okay,
members
joining
us
fasting.
We
have
rodney
henry
from
rodney
henry
architecture.
D
To
make
a
representation
as
the
agent
in
support
of
the
application?
Okay,
mr
henry
you'll,
have
three
minutes
to
make
your
representation.
Hopefully
you'll
have
a
clock
saying
three
minutes
on
your
screen
down
to
two
there.
We
are
three
so
just
kind
of
just
going
to
hand
over
to
yourself
and
when
you
start
to
speak
that
clocks,
then
gonna
count
down
over
to
yourself.
AB
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Yes,
as
trudy
had
said,
there,
we
put
an
application
in
for
for
an
unfull
site
on
the
basis
on
january
2012,
the
richest
broiler
house
was
totally
intact,
which
we
feel
did
create
an
unfull
with
the
other
than
two
dollar
houses
of
62
and
64.,
and
they
say
that
was
put
in
in
january
2020
two
years
ago.
I
think,
with
that
there
was
a
I've
been
several
planning.
Officers
were
dealing
with
it.
AB
AB
That
was
really
beyond
our
control,
but
I
suppose
the
the
application
be
put
in
in
january
from
tonight.
The
building
has
gone
from
that.
AB
We
have
no
say
on
that
there
on
the
time
scale
it
was
taken
to
to
bring
it
forward.
The
pandemic
really
put
a
break,
but
brakes
and
everything,
but
just
as
of
the
info
itself,
there's
a
few
different
things.
One
recommend
for
refusal,
you
know
for
for
rebel
development
and
so
on.
I
think,
there's
a
betterment
for
have
a
state
here,
there's
been
there's
been:
no,
there
has
been
no
recommendations
of
otherwise
from
from
the
from
the
neighbors
they're
they're
hopping
off
for
from
their
site.
AB
On
that
there's
been,
they
haven't,
objected
to
it
and,
yes,
the
site
itself
is
raises
above
the
it's
raised
above
the
dairy
scallop
road,
as
are
number
62
and
64..
So
there's
a
there's,
the
same
thing
a
lot
along
along
those
lines:
integration,
wise
you're,
looking
at
it
straight
when
you
come
from
from
the
south
of
the
road,
there
is
gold,
but
from
the
north
as
well.
AB
Yes,
I
understand
that
the
gap
now
has
has
changed
the
right
way
with
one
of
the
buildings
coming
away,
but
and
and
the
policy
it
means
it
doesn't
specifically
say
that
what
the
building
has
to
be
it
doesn't,
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
have
to
be
a
dwelling
house
or
domestic.
It
was
a
reduced
broiler
house
which
was
totally
intact
at
the
time
we
made
the
application
back
in
back
in
january
2012..
AB
D
D
Thank
you,
mr
henry,
so
you're
bang
on
time
there
that's
not
to
just
step.
You
know
place
yourself
on
me,
but
obviously
you'll
still
be
here
to
consider
you
know
any
any
questions
that
are
asked
in
your
way.
It's.
AB
D
F
Thank
you
sure.
Thank
you,
trinity
for
your
important
thank
you
to
the
agent
there
for
his
summation,
just
probably
for
the
agent.
Firstly,
there's
a
photograph
in
his
report
showing
a
shed
demolished
in
october
2019.
F
I
think
that
he
just
stopped
that
it
was
the
storms
in
august
2020
that
that
caused
this
building
to
to
become
derelict
when
he
heard
address.
I
just
want
some
clarity
in
the
name,
because
I
think
what
he
said
there
that
this
storms
in
august
2020
caused
their
nationals.
But
then
we've
got
a
picture
here
october
2019,
where
it's
quite
clear
that
the
first
broiler
house
is
there's
no
roof
on
it.
It
looks
like
a
room,
so
just
gonna
be
better
mclarty.
Has
that
exactly
what
happened
and
william?
AB
Yes
and
2012,
they
won
the
application
january
2012.
The
application
was
made.
The
broader
house
had
been
reduced
in
size
at
the
back
of
the
site
that
forms
the
the
building.
That's
that
the
application
is
the
the
broader
house
have
been
at
the
front
of
the
site.
It
was
damaged.
Prior
to
that
right,
it
was
it
was.
It
was
also
gone.
AB
I
know
for
a
fact
in
2017
and
they've
been
a
previous
application
that
I
was
involved
in
for
that,
but
I'm
just
looking
at
spittle
and
I'm
up
just
on
my
on
my
other
computer.
So
back
in
I
that
reduced
broader
house,
which
was
I
felt,
was
creating.
AB
The
end
fault
was
totally
unpacked
there,
but
they
had
a
photograph
there
of
of
the
broader
house
up
towards
the
back
of
the
site,
which,
what
shows
up
that's
there
was
there
was
photographs
of
the
broader
house
at
the
time
when
the
application
was
made,
that
was,
it
was
totally
impactful
with
roof
walls
and
sides
on.
D
Thank
you,
mr
henry.
Okay,
you
won't
come
back
in
that
country's
november.
I
Thank
you
just
for
clarification,
an
ex
explanation
here,
the
foundations
of
a
dwellings
to
the
rear
of
the
the
site.
I
AA
Thank
you
chair,
yes,
alderman
anderson,
those
foundations
have
been
in
place
for
some
time
and
there
is
a
a
lengthy
plan
on
history
on
that
side.
Going
back
to
2003..
AA
My
understand
is
that
it
doesn't
belong
to
this
applicant
and
because
it
has
commenced
it
there's
no
timeline
in
terms
of
when
it
has
to
be
finished
it
has
commenced.
It
appears
to
be
in
accordance
with
the
approvals.
So,
as
I
say,
it
could
sit
like
that
forever
or
could
be
finished.
We
have
no
control
over
that.
S
I
Yeah,
truly
thanks,
I
thought
was
over
there
completely.
I
was
curious
where
they,
where
the
access
is
for
it,
was
it
through
that
site
wherever
napkin
is
playing
this
time,
where's
the
access.
Thank
you.
AA
There
are
actually
two
routes
into
that
application
site,
so
one
of
them
is
actually
through
the
same
entrance
as
number
64.,
and
at
one
time
there
had
been
a
proposed
access
that
came
up
the
same
lane
as
we
would
have
well.
I
would
have
access
to
take
the
photographs
of
the
poultry
house,
so
there
was
a
laneway
run
up.
That
way.
To
be
honest,
I
don't
have
the
approval
with
me.
S
AA
Know
for
definitely
which
one
it
is,
but
the
access
remains
that
it
can
be
achieved
either
way
if
this
application
were,
if
he's
reminded
to
approve
it.
D
Just
just
one
for
myself
to
dispose
of
saying
that,
because
the
building
as
it
stands
now
is
in
a
state
of
I
don't
know
collapse
or
their
election,
that
it
can't
be
and
as
opposed
to
its
stable
building
at
the
time
it
comes
to
uncommonly
when
we're
taking
our
decision,
I
guess
is
that
what
you're
sort
of
saying,
because
obviously
it
was
there
at
a
certain
point,
but
now
it
isn't
so
is
that
do
we
have
to
make
our
decision
on
what
the
facts
are
on
the
ground?
Does
it
speak?
Let's
bring
in.
AA
Thank
you
chair.
It's
twofold.
Yes,
the
the
building
itself
is
can't
be
considered
to
be
a
building
anymore
because
of
the
state
that
it's
in,
but
the
other
thing
is,
it
doesn't
have
a
frontage
because
the
walls
of
the
the
other
poultry
heights
are
in
place.
So
it
breaks
the
frontage
between
the
building
that
the
applicant
wants
us
to
consider
and
the
road.
So
technically
it
doesn't
have
a
road
frontage.
AA
D
Thanks
thanks
trudy,
please
don't
have
any
other
questions
myself,
I'm
not
seeing
any
lights
on
members,
so
we
could
have
to
move
under
the
debate
stage.
J
I
was
just
looking
other
than
just
with
previous
experience
applications
through
the
committee.
You
know
there
is
a
fair
way:
output
on
this
type
of
situation,
where
it's
very
clear
their
election,
and
I
know
even
on
replacement
dwellings
and
such
like
there's
a
percentage
of
completion.
J
You
know
in
terms
of
what
a
building
visually
looks
like
and
it's
very
clear
that
this
is
fairly
derelict.
So
you
know
I
am
looking
out
here
in
the
face
of
it
of
the
opinion
that
I
agree
with
with
the
plan
on
officer's
recommendation.
F
Thank
you,
chair
on,
I
would
concur
with
alderman
wilson
seeing
the
pictures.
I
know
a
lot
of
the
time
when
we
come
to
these
applications.
There's
fine
lines,
there's
medications
and
there's
a
lot
to
think
about
and
consider.
But
these
pictures
don't
really
tell
a
lie
in
terms
of
what's
been
presented
on
the
policy.
So
you
know,
I'm
minded
to
agree
that
the
the
officer
has
got
the
correct
recommendation
in
this
case.
D
Like
a
counter
savage
okay,
I'm
not
saying
any
lights
on
so
any
numbers
of
any
other
reviews
on
the
debate
stage
here
you
know
so
move
into
the
session
phase.
Okay,
remember
any
proposals
on
this
application.
J
Yes,
who's
just
flown
on
from
the
debate
natural
progression
to
propose
that
we
accept
the
recommendation
of
the
plan
official.
F
Thank
you
chair
and
I'm
content
to
second
alderman
wilson's
proposal
that
we
accepted
planning
officer's
recommendation,
as
outlined
in
the
report.
Thank
you.
D
Okay,
thank
you.
Cam
members
for
the
proposal
on
the
floor
from
alderman
wilson
seconded
by
councilman
savage,
to
accept
the
officer's
recommendation
to
refuse
and
all
proposals.
D
And
that's
the
only
other
members
of
all
the
great
okay,
I'm
I'm
rolling
great.
What's
up,
and
then
thank
you
to
mr
henry
for
for
taking
part
here
tonight.
Okay,
members
from
moving
on
to
pandx3,
maybe
just
get
that
object
or
the
person
in
and
also
cancer
nicholson.
If
he's
about.
D
D
D
Okay,
remember
so
we'll
move
on
to
appendix
three,
which
is
application,
number
load,
slash
twenty
twenty
star,
zero;
seven,
eight
three
slash
go
and
I'm
gonna
hand
over
to
liam
mccrum
senior
planning
officer
to
present
our
report
and
powerpoint
presentation.
G
Thank
you
chair.
This
application
seeks
outline
planning
permission
for
dwelling
house
and
guards
in
compliance
with
the
infill
policy
test
of
cty
it.
This
application
is
before
members,
as
was
called
in
by
alderman
rankin.
The
application
site
lies
in
the
open
country
side.
It's
defended
the
local
area
plan.
Therefore,
the
policy
context
is
provided
by
the
spps
and
pbs21.
G
One
of
the
principal
forms
of
development
that
is
acceptable
in
the
countryside
is
under
cty
yid.
The
cty
test
has
four
specific
elements
in
relation
to
the
first
test.
Officers
consider
that
there
is
not
a
substantial
and
continuously
built
up
frontage
along
this
section
of
drumroll
road
officers
are
of
the
opinion
that
that
the
two
small
buildings
within
the
existing
substation
compound
do
not
occur
frontiers
onto
the
road.
G
In
addition,
the
cartilage
of
the
compound
does
not
abut
the
drum
bottle
throat
and
a
setback
behind
a
verge
of
mature
conifer
trees
with
only
having
its
access
on
a
direct
front.
It's
onto
the
road
members
will
be
aware
that
a
building
will
only
have
a
frontage
onto
the
road
if
the
plot
on
which
it
stands
up,
butts
or
shares
of
boundary.
With
the
road
in
this
instance,
the
small
buildings
within
the
compound
are
set
back
approximately
35
meters
from
the
road
and
only
have
their
access
onto
the
road
officers.
G
Consider
that
number
47
does
have
a
fronties
onto
the
road.
However,
the
outbuilding
to
the
rear
of
number
47
fails.
The
same
policy
test
officers
consider
that
the
proposed
development
fields,
the
first
test
of
cty.
Yet
the
second
test
requires
that
the
application
site
represents
a
small
gap
site
sufficient
only
to
accommodate
up
to
a
maximum
of
two
houses.
Officers
in
this
instance
consider
the
application
site
is
a
small
gap
site
and
can
only
accommodate
one
dwelling
therefore
acceptable
under
the
second
test.
The
third
test
requires
the
proposed
development
respects.
G
The
existing
pattern
of
development
along
the
established
folders
again
officers
consider
this
test
to
be
satisfied
in
regard
to
the
fourth
test,
the
site
about
an
electricity
substation
officers.
Consider
that
the
applicant
has
failed
to
demonstrate
that
the
proposed
development
would
provide
an
acceptable
living
environment
for
the
prospective
residents
by
reason
of
noise
and
would
therefore
cause
demonstrable
harm
to
interest
to
acknowledge
importance.
G
The
proposal
is
therefore
not
considered
as
an
exception
on
their
cty
yet,
and
the
development
is
considered
to
be
unacceptable.
Development
in
the
countryside
under
cty1
officers.
Consider
the
proposed
development
meets
the
spps
and
pps21s
in
terms
of
the
integration
test
means
enclosure.
However,
as
I
learned
previously,
post
development
would
constitute
a
ribbon
of
development
and
therefore
failed
cty
yid
and
therefore
subsequently
fails
the
policy
test
of
cty
14
in
the
creation
of
ribbon
development
and
adaptamental
chains
to
the
real
character
in
terms
of
access
and
parking.
G
A
consultation
access
has
been
carried
out
with
dfi
roads
and
officers,
have
no
objections
in
terms
of
impact
of
immunity.
Officers
in
consultation
with
environmental
health
department
and
lee
have
concerns
in
relation
to
the
quality
of
the
residential
immunity
afforded
to
potential
occupants
of
the
proposed
dwelling
due
to
the
proximity
to
the
electricity
substation,
the
site
directly
above
this
facility,
with
the
exception
of
boundary
vegetation
environmental
health,
advised
that
they
should
be
re-consulted
with
any
additional
information
in
support
of
this
application.
None
was
forthcoming.
G
G
G
This
is
just
a
view
along
the
proposed
site
front,
which
you
can
see
the
sort
of
impulsive
fence
in
there
of
the
entrance
to
the
electricity
compound
on
our
site.
Just
in
the
distance.
G
You
can
just
about
make
out
the
view
of
the
outbuildings
that
are
set
inside
the
compound
that
the
applicant
is
relying
on
as
part
of
those
buildings
that
have
a
fronties
onto
the
road
they're
set
behind
sort
of
numerous
pieces
of
apparatus
within
said
compound
next
slide,
please
now.
This
is
the
view
from
the
road,
your
road
front,
it's
of
the
dumbbell
road,
when
you
can
see
that
essentially
there's
an
area
of
hard
standing
which
forms
the
access
point
into
the
compound.
G
D
Thank
you,
vm.
Okay
members,
as
you
can
see
an
attempt
with
eddie
quinn
from
raquen
architects
to
make
a
representation
of
the
agent
in
support
of
the
application.
Mr
quinn,
you
have
three
minutes
to
speak.
Just
get
the
clock
set
up
here
now.
AC
Thank
you
very
much,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
for
allowing
this
opportunity
to
make
this
presentation
reviewing
the
reasons
a
for
the
refusal
of
the
grant
of
the
outline
planning
permission
together
with
the
officer's
assessment.
Two
matters
specifically
on
a
mr
mccronner
has
alluded
to
them
to
them.
They
appear
to
the
basis
of
for
refusal
of
the
recommendation.
AC
Now,
no
further
details
or
information
relating
to
this
were
requested.
AC
The
footage
onto
that
moving
on
to
the
the
which
I
consider
the
more
a
important
item,
the
more
fundamental
issue.
The
point
really
is
a
the
pointed
issue
regarding
the
site
down
application
centers
on
whether
the
development
of
the
site
can
be
considered
as
an
infill
and
whether
the
entire
front
boundary
of
the
neighboring
electricity
substation
site,
extends
to
jumbo
on
the
road.
AC
D
Okay,
remember
so,
just
also
no
well
you're
able
to
know
no
you're
you're
able
to
answer
any
questions
that
okay,
so
take
it
you're
leaving.
Then
okay,
well
you're
able
to
answer
any
questions
that
any
members
would
have
of
you.
So
I'd
encourage
you
to
sort
of
say
and
if
any
questions
do
you
get
directed
to
your
bro
certainly
bring
you
in
at
that
point,.
D
S
D
F
Thank
you
chair
for
bringing
him
in
there
on
folks.
Thank
you
for
your
presentations
on
the
hr,
you're,
quite
correct
and
adhering
to
the
protocol
of
the
committee,
and
that
has
happened
before
and
that's
a
normal
procedure.
Just
a
little
question
for
liam
three
questions.
Liam
in
this
application,
are
they
everland
on
the
the
two
buildings
in
the
substation
and
the
building
behind
the
other
property
to
us
of
three
buildings?
G
Essentially,
the
reliance
is
upon
the
two
buildings
within
the
substation.
The
building
to
the
rear
of
number
47
was
just
a
point
of
clarification
for
officers.
In
case
it
was
brought
up
that
we
didn't
consider
it
to
have
a
frontage,
but
essentially
what
I
think
the
applicant
is
actually
reliant
upon
is
number
47
and
the
two
buildings
that
occupy
the
back
section
of
the
substation
that
lay
to
the
north
of
the
albuquerque
side.
E
Yep
thanks
sharon,
thanks
to
all
the
speakers
so
far
in
relation
to
this
application,
liam's
first
post
going
on
from
chris
savage's
question.
You
know-
and
maybe
I
missed
something
here,
but
are
you
accepting
that
the
two
buildings
when
the
within
the
in
the
ess,
the
electrical
substation,
are
forming
part
of
the
the
frontage?
Or
are
you
saying
these
aren't
they're
not
that
they're
not
acceptable,
because
obviously
the
discussion
has
been
very
much
around
frontage.
E
G
No
kind
of
like
listen
we're
not
we've.
We've
decided
those
buildings,
don't
have
a
frontage
onto
the
road,
because
essentially
the
cartilage
of
that
substation
doesn't
extend
to
the
road,
as
appears
on
the
ground,
what
land
registry
maps
say
and
stuff.
Maybe
what
the
agent
has
alluded
to
when
you
actually
visit
the
site
and
you
look
at
the
aerials
that
are
provided
in
the
powerpoint
presentation.
The
opinion
of
officers
was
that
the
substation
is
set
back
as
set
out
in
the
officer's
assessment
and
therefore
the
substation
itself
doesn't
have
a
fronties
onto
the
road.
E
Just
again
to
get
it
clear
in
my
head,
obviously
it's
clear
from
the
photograph
the
two
gates
are
accessed
off
the
drum
branch
and
there's
al
also.
You
know,
I
suppose,
there's
bits
of
landscape
to
the
side
and
where
the
boundaries
is
debatable,
whatever
yeah,
okay,
but
so
you're,
saying
that
those
double
gates
accessing
off
that
road
aren't
a
frontage
and-
and
you
know,
you're
saying
that
that
isn't
the
frontage
and
that's
that's.
Why
you're
discounting
the
two
buildings
rather
than
you
but
you're,
accepting
their
two
buildings?
G
G
Yeah
yeah,
you
can
see
from
that
quite
clearly
that
the
access
point
is
onto
the
road.
You
can
see
the
line
that
that
defines
the
binder.
That's
the
palisade
fencing
that
encloses
the
compound.
You
can
see
that
the
access
point
fronts
onto
the
road
and
and
essentially
that's
what
we're
seeing
here.
Those
fencing
are
set
back
approximately
10
meters
from
the
actual
road
frontiers
itself,
and
you
can
see
in
the
photographs
the
area
of
hearthstone
to
the
front,
that's
the
point
of
entry
and
then
all
the
applications
we've
dealt
with
the
committee
to
date.
E
All
right
sure-
and
I
don't
mean
to
sort
of
but
again
I
know
what
you're
saying
like
we
have
the
ones
where
there's
laneways
onto
the
road
and
there's
nothing,
nothing
else.
You
know,
but
this
is
a
new
one.
For
us,
that's
a
substation,
I
have
to
say
like
infill
policies
is,
is
the
policy
it
just
keeps
giving?
E
I
think,
but
a
you
know,
I
suppose,
but
if
there
was
a
a
laneway
on
two
verges
that
linked
on
the
road
we
we've
accepted
that
in
the
past,
as
as
having
frontage
under
the
road,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
get
my
head.
G
Yeah,
essentially,
I
think
we've
taken
actually
a
different
view
to
that.
They're
not
verges
they're,
actually
part
of
the
established
residential
cartilage,
and
they
have
to
be
part
of
the
residential
cartilage
and
that's
what
we've
accepted
and
it
can't
be
just
a
small
swathe
of
ground.
It
has
to
be
a
substantial.
G
J
Yeah,
I
suppose
it's
gonna,
just
okay,
so
nicole,
has
has
dealt
with
a
lot
of
it
was
if
you
were
looking
at
it
and
took
those
two
smaller
buildings
as
a
small
you
know,
dwelling,
for
instance,
the
person
was
worried
about
his
security
and
he
erected
a
similar
type
of
fence
only
not
as
high
would
we
would
it?
Is
it
the
simple
fact
that
this
perimeter
or
the
square
enclosure
is
set
back
off
the
road
and
is
screened
only
leaving?
The
access
point.
J
J
The
discussion
that's
developed
and
they
may
be
pertinent
to
that
issue,
and
if
the
chair
is
agreeable,
I
would
like
to
hear
the
last
two
paragraphs.
If
possible,.
D
Yeah,
oh
I'll,
bring
into
the
dance
last
question.
First.
G
Yeah
holden,
wilson
yeah.
That's
one
aspect
of
the
refusal
reason
that
says
that
the
sort
of
catalyst
doesn't
have
a
frontline
or
the
sec.
The
second
aspect
of
it
was
that
the
buildings
themselves
don't
have
a
visual
presence
on
the
road
front.
It's
because
they're
set
behind
all
the
apparatus
and
they're.
Basically,
they
don't
have
a
visual
frontage
onto
the
road.
So
it's
it's
it's
twofold.
If
you
like.
AC
I
very
much
appreciate
that.
Thank
you
for
that.
Just
following
on
from
the
fact
that
I
have
clearly
said
that
the
boundary
is
right
to
the
front
which
that's
the
boundary
of
the
whole
site.
AC
So,
following
on
from
that
point,
the
assertion
that
the
the
within
that
barn,
that
I've
referred
to
the
potion
wire
boundary
fence
as
a
compound-
and
that
is
a
security
compound,
a
with
the
fixed
electrical
plant
and
apparatus
and
that's
a
policy
advance
that
is
there
for
the
purposes
of
security
and
health
and
safety
issues
because
of
the
risk
to
life
in
them.
A
the
compound
is
for
security
and
health
and
safety
purposes.
Only
the
compound
is
an
island
is
an
island
within
the
site
boundary
an
actual
fact.
AC
You
can
walk
right
around
within
between
the
site
boundary
and
that
internal
compound.
At
no
point
does
that
compound
with
it
with
the
buildings
within
it,
come
into
your
contact
with
the
site,
boundary
fence,
as
defined
and
indicated
on
the
land
registry
map.
The.
If
the
ess
boundary
has
a
fronting
the
monothroat
and
has
clearly
defined
the
legal
boundary
of
the
site,
then
the
site,
the
ess
and
number
47-
must
be
considered
and
then
full
site.
Thank
you.
J
Yeah-
and
I
suppose
that
is
you
know,
we
are
dealing
with
a
unique
circumstance
here
in
that
it
isn't
what
we
have
been
used
to
dealing
with
in
terms
of
traditional
structures,
be
that
sheds
or
dwellings
of
various
sizes
and
and
driveway
configurations.
But
I
get
what
mr
quinn
said.
It
is
because
it's
an
electrical,
you
know
installation
it
brings
with
it,
then
all
sorts
of
requirements
in
terms
of
safety
and
have
those
been
taken
into
account.
J
Based
on
the
fact
that
we
are
considering
those
two
structures
as
buildings,
albeit
the
planetary
it
doesn't.
You
know,
the
planner
doesn't
believe
that
the
the
sheriff
frontlines
were
the
rule,
but
you
know
there's
reasons
for
that,
given
that
it
is
an
electrical
substation
for
one
of
a
better
word.
Is
that
a
block?
To
any
I
mean
if
those
buildings
were
closer
to
the
road
and
there
wasn't
the
big
hedge
would
we
be?
J
D
G
Yeah,
no,
all
of
us,
I
suppose
the
fact
that
it's
an
electricity
substation
has
not
formed
part
of
our
consideration
at
all.
All
we
are
looking
at
is
the
fact
that
does
the
the
buildings
that
the
application
is
dependent
upon
have
an
active
frontage
onto
the
road
and,
ultimately,
I
suppose
what
we're
buying
to
look
at
on
policy
is
what
has
developed
along
the
road
frontage.
I
mean
the
the
boundary
that
the
agent
is
talking
to
about.
G
We
have
to
look
at
what
is
developed
on
the
road
and
consider
that
that
is
the
considerable
consideration
that
we're
buying
by
in
terms
of
the
policy
the
developed
frontage
and
whether
or
not
the
developed
front
is,
and
the
buildings
within
that
developed
companies
have
frontiers
onto
the
road,
and
I
suppose
that's
how
we
arrived
at
our
decision,
but
the
fact
that
it
was
an
electricity
compound.
No,
it
hasn't
been
given
any
particular
formal
consideration
within
the
context
of
our
assessment.
F
Liam,
just
considering
that
there
is
no
fencer
or
or
head,
it's
still
the
case
that
the
two
buttons
at
the
back
there
are
some
site
works
in
front
of
them.
Blocking
the
view
of
the
road,
and
with
that
then
it's
your
case
essentially,
is
that
you
know
a
regardless
of
the
fence
or
the
the
the
shrubbery
at
the
front
there
before
the
access
is
that
the
two
buttons
at
the
back
there's
clearly
like
two
lines
of
sight
works
there.
G
Yeah,
essentially,
that's
the
second
part
of
the
argument,
kind
of
kind
of
savage,
and
that
ultimately
argue
is
because
of
the
setback
and
the
intervening
apparatus
that
sit
in
front
of
these
buildings.
That
we
don't
feel
that
they
have
a
visual
presence
onto
the
road
and
therefore
they
don't
sit
as
part
of
the
active
frontage.
E
Yep
thanks
chair
thanks,
everybody.
So
far
liam
a
couple
of
questions,
and
and
again
it's
just
from
my
own
knowledges-
do
nie
substances.
They
got
required
planning
and
if
they
do
then,
is
there
like
a
location
plan
as
part
of
that
approval,
which
would
outline
it's
you
know,
maybe
I'm
going
the
wrong
way
here,
but,
like
you
know,
in
a
dwelling
it
basically
indicates
the
cartilage,
and
that
would
be
something
I
would
like
clarification
on
and
also
chair.
E
G
Yeah
council,
michael,
we
haven't
looked
into
a
plan
history
check
of
the
substation.
What
we're
looking
at
was
just
based
on
what
was
on
the
ground
at
present
and
the
sort
of
the
timeline
and
the
rails
revealed
that
that's
been
in
city
for
an
excessive
period
of
five
years.
So,
whatever
way
it's
been
approved,
ultimately,
what's
on
the
ground.
Now
is
what
we're
considering
as
part
of
the
built
up
frontage.
G
D
Thank
you
and
shauna.
Do
you
want
to
just
come
in
and
get
some
your
view
on
the
sort
of
country
nicholson's
outline
the
noise
impact
assessment,
various
solar
environmental
health
criteria.
C
Sure
so
the
noise
impact
assessment
discussed,
sir.
It
dates
back
to.
I
think
it
was
maybe
2011,
so
it
come
in
initially
for
the
substation.
But
obviously
you
know
at
that
point.
The
oil
and
other
poles
do
well
in
here
wasn't
built,
so
it
didn't
take
into
consideration
the
potential
impact
of
noise
on
this
proposed
dwell
and
supposed
typically,
you
know
being
out
on
site.
It's
like
a
human
like
a
hum
sort
of
buzz
low
frequency
noise
and
it
was
clearly
audible.
E
Yeah
chair,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Sean
thanks
liam,
I
suppose
for
shauna.
You
know
that
hum
that
buzz.
Is
that
seen
as
acceptable
or
is
it
you
know
we,
but
we
buy
our
beware
type
thing:
we've
had
this
discussion.
This
committee
before
chair,
you
know,
is,
from
an
environmental
point
of
view,
like
what
what
is
their
sort
of
recommendation
in
relation
to
that
you
know,
because
of
that
not
at
home
that
noise
is,
it
can
be
mitigated
or
is
it
a
case
of
it's
complete?
C
Yes
suppose
our
counselor
in
principle,
really,
we
would
have
concerns
that
it
would
have
adverse
impacts
on
the
prose
dwell
and,
and
we
would
require
further
information
there.
You
know
on
the
potential
impact
you
know
in
form,
I
suppose,
of
a
noise
impact
assessment.
We
haven't
received
any
further
information.
D
E
S
E
I
I
went
forced
to
say
there's
one
thing
for
sure
this
committee
is
always
interesting:
charlemagne
there's
always
something
new
every
every
committee.
I've
never
seen
that
likes
this
one
before
there's
a
lot
of
unanswered
questions
there
from
hr.
You
know
in
relation
this
a
lot
lot
of
it.
So
and
as
I
say,
it's
it's
a
new
one.
I
have
to
say
you
know,
and
I
can't
even
point
to
anything
else
to
you
know
say
that
you
know
that's.
D
Yeah,
it's
certainly
complex
any
other
reason.
This
one
members.
D
That
one
well
I'm
looking
at
this
photo
and
I
suppose
we're
talking
that
like
if
this
site
is
from
the
chandler
road
and
for
me
it
should
be
agreeing
with
liam
another
dozen
and
looking
at
the
road.
You
can
see
that
you
know
the
tarmac
of
the
road
is
very
much
different
to
the
other.
D
Tarmac
you've
got
even
the
gully
there,
which
is
almost
defined
in
the
the
edge
of
the
road
so
to
speak,
and
then
you
have
what
I
suppose
we
could
call
laneway,
albeit
it's
quite
short,
and
rather
than
long
and
narrow,
and
for
me
I
would
agree
with
the
recommendation
that
that
therefore
then
does
not
have
a
frontage
onto
the
road
plus
taking
account
as
well
the
other
equipment
in
the
way
of
the
alleged
buildings.
D
So
for
me
I
think
that
would
be
a
recommendation.
Here's
the
correct
one
and
that's
in
this
case,
but
certainly
an
interesting
one.
You
need
a
debate
to
debate
on.
D
E
Yeah,
look,
I
think
you
summed
it
up
quite
well
there.
E
As
I
say,
we
see
a
lot
of
these
in
front
of
us
in
this
community
and
he's
infill
sites
and
we've
never
seen
one
like
this
and,
as
I
said,
there's
there's
too
many
sort
of
anomalies
for
me
and
this
one
so
like
as
a
city
in
regards
to
the
the
the
the
the
argument
put
across
whether
it's
got
a
front
page
or
not,
and
I
do
see
you
know
clearly
from
the
photographs
that
you
know
again,
it's
open
to
interpretation
and,
as
I
say
and
my
interpretation
is,
it
doesn't
have
a
frontage
to
the
road
like
yourself
chair
and
I'm
happy
to
propose
the
recommendation.
D
Suppose
I'll
second,
that
proposal,
then
they
agree
with
their
recommendations
through
our
views
as
outlined
in
the
comments
there
so
poser.
They
accept
the
refusal
on
the
site
and
second
by
myself,
any
other
proposals.
Members,
okay,
members,
there's
no
other
proposals
of
all
the
great
members.
D
Okay,
we're
all
agreed
so
just
like
to
thank
mr
quinn,
liam
and
shawna
for
taking
part
in
this
item.
D
Okay,
members
around
the
application
for
appendix
four,
which
is
application,
number
area,
wait:
slash
2021,
slash
one
four:
six,
seven,
slash
chef
just
check
that
everyone's
been
invited
or
into
the
zoom
who
needs
to
be
present;
yeah,
I'm
seeing
diana
and
I'm
seeing
ram.
P
The
reason
this
application
is
before
the
plan
and
regulatory
service
committee
is
because
it's
a
major
application
officers
have
taken
that
members
have
read
the
report
in
full,
including
addendum
and
as
such
as
synopsis.
Only
the
application
sites
appeared
within
the
settlement
element
of
our
my
area
on
sown
housing
land.
As
such,
the
proposal
developed
the
site
for
residential
purposes
complies
with
the
land
use.
Student
of
the
ldp
and
principle
is
considered
acceptable,
subject
to
other
material
considerations.
P
There
is
an
extent
planned
permission
on
this
site.
A
reserve
matters,
application
for
73
residential
units,
which
are
was
approved
on
the
back
of
an
outline
application.
Allowing
an
appeal
officer
will
face
this
application
currently
under
consideration
by
the
council
as
a
new
panel
application,
and
while
the
standard
approval
is
material
consideration
to
serving
of
which
this
application
is
not
duly
burned.
P
P
This
has
been
approved
in
the
previous
phase
of
this
development
officers
can
confirm
that
the
level
of
open
space
is
approximately
11.5
percent
of
the
side
area
which
exceeds
the
minimum
10
percent
provision
as
set
out
in
policy
os2
of
ppva
assets.
An
equipped
play
park
is
located
in
the
middle
of
the
large
area
of
open
space.
P
Other
material
considerations,
including
drainage,
land,
contamination
assessments,
transport
assessment,
waste,
water
treatment
works
and
network
capacity
and
the
appropriate
assessment
have
all
been
appraised
by
the
relevant
authorities
and
no
objections
subject
to
the
conditions
attached
have
been
received.
All
30
all
third
party
objections
have
been
fully
considered
reports
and
addendum,
including
two
additional
conditions.
P
I
wish
to
note
that
a
further
objection
has
now
been
received
this
morning.
It
is
anonymous
and
the
points
raised
in
that
have
already
been
addressed
in
the
report.
However,
it
did
state
that,
upon
renewable
notification
and
advertisement,
the
scheme
moved
the
dwellings
closer
to
the
properties
at
sperm
park
and
not
originally
submitted
with
the
scheme,
and
they
wish
to
object.
To
that
point,
I
was
to
confirm
that
no
dwellings
have
been
moved
closer
to
sparring
park.
P
In
contrast,
they
have
been
moved
one
meter
further
from
the
res
from
the
dwellings
at
spurn
park
following
renewable
notification
advertisement
having
regard
to
the
above
and
after
undertaking
a
policy
assessment
and
planning
balance
in
exercise
officer
of
the
pending
that
post
development
complies
with
the
area
plan,
the
spps
and
all
other
relevant
planning
policies.
On
this
basis
and
subject
to
the
conditions
attached,
it
is
recommended
the
plan
information
be
granted.
P
P
Not
just
a
site
location
plan
is
submitted
with
the
application
pack,
so
that's
the
repose
layout,
as
you
can
see
the
three
central
areas
of
open
space
with
the
larger
in
the
middle,
having
the
proposed
equipped
child's
play
area.
The
orangey
rayleigh
colour
around
is
a
buffer
plant
scheme
to
soften
the
impact
of
the
a
proposed
development
against
those
with
existing
residents
and
to
the
north
is
the
the
real
reality.
P
And
that's
the
proposed
overall
concept
is
for
information
only
but
of
a
development.
This
says
we
require
an
overall
concept
to
ensure
that
we're
not
approving
peaceful
development
in
the
local
area
to
the
north,
a
west
is
extend
planning
approval
on
the
site,
as
referred
to
in
the
report
on
the
end
of
the
south
east.
Is
the
existence
just
to
give
you
an
understanding
of
what
was
approved
on
as
an
extent
and
was
now
proposed.
You
will
note,
there's
73
dwellings
well,
this
is
now
72.
P
Some
two
are
some
semi-tasked
and
some
detached
shots
shows
the
green
tear
and
cash
system,
and
that
is
a
photograph
of
the
one
of
them
at
the
present
time,
which
has
been
constructed
in
the
second
phase
of
the
development
and
how
it
looks
on
the
ground,
and
I
can
confirm
the
safe
sections
has
been
submitted
through
every
single
property
that
surrounds
this
site,
including
existing
repost,
the
red
indication,
because
there
had
been
a
number
of
objections
in
relation
to
the
previous
approval
of
the
site
and
the
red
line
indicates
of
what
was
approved
with
regards
to
the
the
finnish
floor
levels.
P
And
what
is
now
so,
while
it's
two-story
there
will
be
no
higher
than
what
is
previously
approved
on
the
site.
P
That's
just
a
number
of
side
sections
through
the
site.
Just
to
give
you
an
understanding
and
the
levels
that
just
shows
one
of
the
you'll
probably
see
the
dent
report
to
the
site
section
are
the
the
gentleman
queried
in
relation
to
the
existing
trees
and
how
they
will
start.
This
gives
a
close-up
of
existing
trees
and
how
they're
going
to
be
retained.
P
Photograph
2
shows
existing
properties,
that's
an
entry
to
the
site
at
the
present
time.
So
we'll
have
these
georgia
neo
georgian
type
style,
which
reflects
the
architectural
and
quality
of
our
man.
What
is
famous
for
let's
photograph
three,
so
these
are
the
boundaries
along
and
spurn
part
you
can
see
the
one
to
the
top
is
along
the
eastern
boundary
and
then
the
one
am
to
the
bottom
is
just
along
the
southern
boundary
there.
So
you
can
see
there
they're
bungalows
and
there
is
an
existing
hedgerow
and
there's
some
trees
within
that
they're.
P
All
to
be
retained,
you
can
see
how
the
site
then
falls
down
here
to
the
west
and
photograph
four.
I
think
that's
the
best
to
capture
it,
just
the
slope
and
the
sights
of
us
sitting
in
the
far
corner
standing
looking
over
here,
those
resins
spurn
park
and
then
the
topper
spartan
park.
You
can
see
phase
two
under
construction
to
your
right
and
that
bottom
photograph
is
simply
looking
into
melafond
crest.
D
Thank
you,
sinead.
Okay
members,
mixed
up
with
diana
thompson
from
nba
planning
to
make
a
representation
as
agent
and
supporter
application,
dana
you're
very
welcome
to
committee,
we'll
just
get
the
clock
set
up.
Okay,
you
should
see
your
clocks
in
three
minutes
in
front
of
you,
and
so
I'm
going
to
hand
over
to
yourself
and
when
you
begin
to
speak
left
clock
is
going
to
count
down
so
over
to
you.
AD
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
elected
members,
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
address
the
committee
this
evening.
I'm
the
planning
consultant
and
the
named
agent
for
this
application.
Also
on
the
line
is
mr
ryan
makatabi
who's
the
scheme
architect.
So
this
is
the
third
phase
of
the
highly
desirable
deanery
domain
housing
development.
It
was
brought
forward
at
speed
owing
to
the
success
of
the
much
sought-after
first
and
second
phases
of
the
scheme.
AD
Phase
two
is
now
well
underway
and
the
swift
actions
of
your
planning
department
are
bringing
this
recommendation
forward.
This
evening
means
the
contractor
can
move
seamlessly
on
to
the
next
phase.
So
I'd
like
to
pause
there
to
express
our
thanks
to
your
planning
department
for
making
this
happen,
they
are
professional
and
their
can
do.
AD
Attitude
to
their
work
is
a
highly
refreshing
change
and
many
other
local
authorities
could
do
well
to
take
a
leap
from
their
book,
their
real
credit
to
you
and
your
rate
payers,
and
I
have
to
say
it's
an
absolute
pleasure
to
work
with
them.
The
application
site
is
part
of
the
significant
residential
allocation
in
north
armada.
That's
been
in
the
planning
pipeline
for
the
best
part
of
16
years.
AD
The
proposed
housing
allocation
plus
the
part
implemented
planning
consent
that
you've
heard
about
sets
up
the
double
presumption
that
firmly
establishes
the
acceptability
and
principle
of
housing
on
this
site.
AD
The
scheme
is
a
quality
residential
layout
that
holy
complies
with
pps7
and
creating
places.
We
have
read
the
case,
officers
report
and
the
addendums,
and
we
don't
endorse
entirely
its
analysis
and
fully
support
the
recommendation
that
full
planning
permission
should
be
granted.
There
are
no
planning
or
environmental
constraints
to
the
development
of
this
site,
and
this
is
confirmed
by
the
various
consultees
who've
contributed
to
the
planning,
application
and
they're
the
competent
authority
in
each
of
their
specialisms.
AD
D
Thank
you
daryl
and
you're
well
with
within
your
time,
and
the
members
just
mentioned
there,
and
we
also
have
ram
magatabi
the
scheme
architect.
Who's
attending
verizon
does
have
speaking
rights.
If
members
have
any
questions
or
queries
for
okay
members
of
the
didn't
mention
there
was
an
addendum
report
which
has
been
circulated
then,
with
those
in
our
decision
time.
Pack
any
questions
or
queries
on
this
one
members.
E
E
Obviously
within
that
sunday
is
very,
very
welcome
and
I'm
just
wondering
what
the
the
plan
is
in
relation
to
you
know
the
maintenance
and
the
ongoing
sort
of
a
running
of
it
is
the
idea
to
sort
of
transfer
it
into
council,
or
is
it
done
through
a
management
company
or
whatever
and
again
that
that
that
that
applies
obviously
to
open
space
as
well
see
there's
quite
a
large
open
space
there
in
the
middle,
which
again
is
will
will
environmentally,
but
very
very
you
know
the
development
very
attractive,
so
a
couple
requests,
maybe
for
either
shinier
or
diana
thanks.
D
P
P
We
have
asked
for
a
final
final
play,
equipment
and
associate
maintenance
plan
specific
to
the
the
play
area
and
that
the
development
of
the
dwellings
around
it
shall
not
be
commenced
until
that's
with
us
unapproved,
which
shall
include
a
minimum
of
the
design
details,
operation,
installation
maintenance,
inspection
arrangements
and
the
final
play
equipment
then
shall
be
carried
out
in
conformity
with
that.
As
we're
truly
aware
of
that,
you
know
if
these
have
to
be
maintained
in
perpetuity.
AD
Well,
they're
all
ready
as
a
management
company
set
up
to
manage
the
open
space
and
landscaping
areas
around
this
development
site.
So
while
it's
not
properly
formally
constituted
yet
I
imagine
that
the
proposal
will
be
that
the
play
park
becomes
the
management
company's
responsibility
as
well,
and
as
that
condition
says,
we
have
to
agree
those
details
with
the
planning
authority
before
construction
starts.
D
Thank
you,
diana
any
questions
or
queries
members
on
this
one,
I'm
not
saying
I
write
so
on
so
moving
to
the
debate
stage
and
if
using
this
one
members
seems,
like
a
you
know,
very
strong,
strong
application.
For
me,
I
do
remember
at
least
one
of
the
previous
phases
coming
to
committee.
Maybe
it
was
one
or
two
years
back
and
you
know
that's
the
same.
You
know
to
be
again
a
strong,
a
strong
application
and
agree
about
the
player
parker
that
it
is
important.
Have
you
know
that
structure
in
place
towards
current
maintenance?
D
Look
we
told,
but
so
it
does
seem
that
it
will
be
an
additional
asset
to
that
housing
development
which
I
think
may
have
a
couple
of
phases
in
the
future
as
well.
But
it
seems
like
a
good,
a
good
one
to
approve
for
me
country
nicholson,.
E
Yeah
sure
agree
as
as
usual
with
sinead
a
very,
very
detailed
report
and
hard
to
sort
of
find
a
question
to
ask
in
it,
because
it's
all
there
and
and
again
all
the
sections
and
things
between
obviously
the
concern
with
the
release
of
sperm
park
and
obviously
the
development.
And
you
know
the
sections
are
all
there.
It's
all
clear
so
and,
as
you
say
that
it's
a
third
phase
of
a
very
successful
development
and
the
you
know
all
the
details
there
so
yeah.
E
D
E
I
think,
as
we've
already
said,
I
think
it's
yeah.
Yes
sure
I
think,
as
we
already
said
like
it's,
it's
a
it's
a
good
application.
It's
third
phase!
It's
a
very
successful
development,
normal
city,
it's
great
new
homes,
it's
creating
a
value,
a
wide
range
of
different
homes
and
I'm
happy
to
basically
propose
the
recommendation
chair.
Thank
you.
J
Yeah
somewhere
being
and
it's
a
good
step
forward
for
some
highs
in
need
in
the
in
the
area,
and
you
know
you
have
to
be
struck
by
the
investment
in
the
road
network
in
that
area,
I
think
it
was
2.4
million
developer
has
spent
us
for
a
bit
of
front
loading
in
terms
of
his
own
resources,
and
so
that's
commendable,
and
I
don't
think
anybody
could
complain
about
the
access
in
our
data
but
as
well.
It's
fairly
wide
and
open
and
and
obviously
no
expense
has
been
spurred
in
that.
So
I'm
happy
enough.
D
Thank
you
oldman
wilson,
so
proposal
by
country
next
on
second
by
following
wilson
to
appraise
the
recommendations
and
other
proposals,
members.
No,
so
we're
all
great
okay,
we're
all
agreeing
that
one
just
like
to
thank
sinead
and
diana
and
ryan
ryan
you
gotta
face.
You
didn't
have
to
answer
any
questions
so
wish
us
all
the
best
for
the
rest
of
your
evening.
D
Okay,
well,
that's
that's
the
person
invited
into
the
zoom
okay,
so
we're
hanging
over
to
nikola,
cleaner
senior
planning
officer
to
present
their
important
powerpoint
presentation.
AE
Thank
you
firstly
like
to
point
out
that
condition
one.
If
I
could
add
some
extra
text,
it
should
read,
with
the
exception
of
the
regrading
mark,
retaining
wall
proposed
fencing
between
number
29
and
31
and
31
and
33.,
and
soft
and
hard
landscaping.
This
permission
is
granted
under
section
55
of
the
planning
act,
northern
ireland
2011
as
amended
and
takes
effect
from
the
date
of
this
decision
notice.
So
just
that
we
small
section
about
the
fencing
this
application
is
for
the
retention
of
three
dwellings
at
corn,
ray
including
marks
to
the
rear
gardens.
AE
The
dwellings
have
been
constructed
at
a
higher
finish
floor
level
than
was
previously
approved,
and
this
has
resulted
in
steeply
sloping
banks
to
their
rear
gardens,
particularly
in
number
31
and
33..
The
proposal
includes
works
to
the
gardens
to
regrade
them
and
make
them
more
usable.
The
recommendation
is
to
approve
and
the
application
has
been
presented
to
committee.
Due
to
the
number
of
objections
received,
there
were
15
letters
of
objection
and
19
letters
of
support,
as
advised
in
the
report.
AE
This
proposal
has
been
amended
during
the
processing
to
address
the
concerns
of
the
adjoining
residence
and
there's
been
no
objections
submitted
to
the
most
recent
proposal,
which
has
been
considered
infill
against
the
relevant
planning
policies
and
there's
no
objections
from
the
relevant
consultaes
I'll.
Just
go
through
the
presentation.
AE
So
this
is
the
site,
you
probably
know
it's
just
immediately
beside
the
large
tescos
and
krigalen
next
slide.
Please,
and
this
is
the
location
of
the
site.
AE
It's
immediately
adjoining
a
cycle
and
walkway
track,
which
goes
into
towards
rushmere
and
towards
tesco's
next
slide
place,
and
these
other
three
houses,
number
29,
31
and
33,
and
just
have
identified
some
of
the
adjacent
properties
immediately
beside
it
next
slide,
and
these
are
the
the
details,
then,
in
terms
of
the
site
layout
and
the
details
in
terms
of
the
plant
and
regrade
and
proposed,
and
there's
cross-sections
then
provided
in
regards
to
the
looking
at
how
it
relates
to
the
properties
immediately
adjacent
next
slide.
AE
Please
and
I've
just
done
a
detail
of
that
as
well.
Just
to
let
you
see
what
that
refers
to
in
terms
of
retaining
the
existence,
there's
a
fence
originally,
that
fence
had
actually
been
proposed
to
be
removed
and
a
2.55
meter,
high
wall
and
fence
replacing
it,
but
that
has
been
taken
away.
So
it's
the
existing
fence
is
being
retained
to
the
rear
and
then
the
works
proposed
are
shown
within
the
drawn
next
slide.
Please
that's
just
some
cross-sections,
then
a
detail
of
it
next
slide,
and
these
are
the
heist
type
elevations.
AE
As
I
say,
these
houses
actually
have
been
constructed,
so
you'll
be
able
to
see
them
in
the
photographs,
and
this
is
31
and
33
the
plans
and
elevations
next
slide.
Please
are
submitted
with
us
as
part
of
the
package.
Next
slide
please.
AE
So
these
are
the
the
houses
number
29,
31
and
33
and
they're,
as
I
say,
immediately
beside
the
cycle
and
walkway
next
slide.
Please
and
just
the
detail
of
the
the
houses
next
slide,
that's
a
view,
then,
from
the
other
side,
the
other
direction
just
looking
towards
the
houses,
and
you
can
see
that
the
land
and
levels
around
there
there
are
houses
sitting
immediately
at
the
same
sort
of
height
as
well
adjacent
next
slide.
AE
AE
This
is
the
site
garden
of
number
33
so
that
the
side
and
rear
that
there's
a
steep
bank
and
this
proposal
then
will
provide
steps
down
into
a
lower
area
which
will
be
more
usable
for
the
the
residents
that
live
in
that
house
next
slide,
please
at
the
minute
they
have
a
privacy
panel
which
they're
using
to
try
and
provide
some
privacy.
So
this,
as
I
say
when
it's
re-graded,
will
provide
them
with
more
usable
space.
Next
slide,
please
this
is
the
existing.
AE
You
can
see
the
garden
of
number
31
just
through
that
fence,
but
it's
not
just
quite
as
as
bad
as
number
33,
but
you
can
see
that
they're
quite
similar
like
slide
plays,
and
then
this
is
further
along
at
number
29,
where
the
ground
levels
are
are
not
as
as
steep
in
terms
of
the
bank
months
next
slide,
please,
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
context
really
with
the
properties
and
the
adjoining
properties
immediately
surrounded
up
next
slide,
please
just
from
the
rear
and
next
slide.
AE
D
Thank
you,
nikola.
Okay
members,
also
joining
us
verizon
have
eliza
elizabeth
brilla
to
make
a
representation
support
of
the
application.
Elizabeth
you're
very
welcome
to
committee.
Today.
You
should
see
a
clock
with
saying
three
minutes
on
it.
I'm
going
to
hand
over
to
you
now
so
when
you
begin
to
speak
your
your
class
classical
account
down,
you
have
three
minutes
to
to
give
your
presentation
so
over
to
you.
K
Evening,
everyone,
three
years
ago,
when
we
decided
to
purchase
our
forever
home,
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
house
that
we
picked
had
a
vast
size
garden.
We
also
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
bach
garden
would
be
leveled
so
that
there
was
no
threat
of
reduced
privacy
and
that
our
future
children
would
have
a
safe
place
to
play
and
explore.
As
the
house,
we
were
renting
at
the
time
had
a
slope
at
the
back
garden
and
no
privacy
at
all.
K
When
we
came
across
the
plot,
where
house
says
number
33,
it
looked
perfect
all
the
drawings,
it
checked
all
the
boxes,
so
it
was
a
no-brainer
for
us
to
secure
our
dream
home
close
to
the
completion
we
started
noticing
that
something
was
not
quite
right
when
it
came
to
the
back
garden.
We
immediately
raised
our
concerns
with
both
the
estate
agent
and
the
builder,
but
both
discarded
our
concerns
straight
away.
K
The
day
we
received
our
keys,
we
were
shocked
at
the
state
of
our
yard
was
left
and
given
to
us,
and
to
this
day
we
cannot
understand
the
fact
that
a
new
build
home
should
be
at
a
higher
standard
than
what
it
is.
K
At
this
point
we
try
time
and
time
again
to
reach
the
builder
in
person
through
their
office
and
via
phone
call,
but
they
always
rejected
us
and
we
even
sought
out
advice
from
a
surveyor
at
own
cost
and
eventually,
when
nothing
came
to
it,
we
decided
to
approach
the
bd's
office
as
well
as
this
has
caused
us
a
fair
amount
of
stress.
We
decided
to
put
you
know,
building
a
family
off
for
quite
a
while.
We
now
have
a
baby
girl
and
our
neighbors
on
number
33.
K
They
have
a
child
that
has
never
number
31
sorry,
they
have
a
child
that
has
never
played
in
their
yard
to
this
day,
and
it's
been
three
years
since
we
are
living.
You
know
in
our
houses,
our
garden
is
158
square
meters,
with
56
square
meters
being
unusable
to
the
steep
sloping
nature
of
the
ground,
and
we
also
have
no
level
leveled
area
in
the
rear
garden.
K
There
is
a
1.8
meter,
high
fence
surrounding
the
garden,
but,
as
you
can
see
by
the
images,
our
back
garden
is
completely
exposed
to
the
main
road,
so
everyone
can
look
into
our
yard
every
time
we
go
outside
it's
very
uncomfortable
for
us
to
spend
any
time
in
our
yard,
because
we
have
you
know
all
the
neighbors
looking
at
us
in
the
main
road
and
to
finish,
I
would
like
to
thank
the
abc
planning
enforcement
for
their
support
and
help
through
this
difficult
time,
and
I
would
also
like
to
see
if
the
approval
of
this
application
today
will
finally
get
our
home
finished
to
the
standard
that
we
like
and
we'll
be
able
to
play
with
our
daughter
outside,
hopefully
soon.
D
Thanks,
thank
you,
elizabeth
you're,
you're.
Well,
within
your
time,
and
and
that's
you
still
stay
on,
zoom
doesn't
kiss
any
members.
Do
you
have
any
questions
or
queries
for
yourself,
but
again,
thank
you
for
your
presentation.
Okay,
members.
Is
there
any
questions
or
queries
on
this?
One
alderman
wilson.
J
Yeah,
I
suppose,
just
listen
to
the
contributor
there.
Obviously
this
comes
off
the
back
of
enforcement
action.
I
understand
and
I'm
just
wondering
in
terms
of
building
control
on
that
and
I'm
not
just
entirely
sure
what
types
of
checks
and
balances
are
put
on
that.
But
would
there
not
have
been
an
opportunity
to
catch
this
on
a
much
earlier
stage?
J
J
Where
there's
you
know,
enforcement
and
then
mitigation-
and
this
certainly
appears
like
a
prize
case
of
something
being
built
that
isn't,
according
to
the
plan
and
council
and
having
to
come
to
some
type
of
you
know,
mitigation
arrangement
to
avoid
something
being
completely
demolished
on
levels.
You
know
built
as
per
plan
versus
coming
to
some
type
of
sticky
plaster
solution
where
you're,
re-greeted
and
building
retaining
walls-
and
you
know
increasing
the
height
offenses
on
a
resident-
has
to
actually
go
and
purchase.
J
S
J
J
Some
type
of
greater
involvement
throughout
the
procedure
that
we
don't
end
up
on
these
situations,
because
it's
people,
like
we've,
we've
heard
here,
picking
up
the
pieces
at
perhaps
their
own
expense
when
they
were,
you
know,
obviously
purchasing
something
that
protect
their
boxes.
As
the
saying
goes,
I
think
they
really
use
that
term,
but
had
to
endure
a
procedure
to
get
to
the
point
that
they're
at
today.
I
just
appreciate
it
anybody's
feeling,
nothing
that
was
in
the
cloud
service.
AE
Thank
you
chair.
It
is
a
very
difficult
one.
We
we
wouldn't
look
at
those
details
until
they
are
reported
through
planning
enforcement.
I'm
not
entirely
sure.
Maybe
damian
wanted
to
speak
about
the
links
with
building
control,
but
they
should
be
working
off
the
same
drawings
as
us,
and
I'm
not
entirely
sure
about
what
checks
they
would
do
during
the
process
and
but
in
terms
of
planning.
We
would
really
only
be
looking
at
those
issues
should
they
be
subject
to
building
control,
sorry
enforcement.
AE
AE
G
You
nicola
and
damian.
Do
you
want
to
come
in
yeah.
Excuse
me
thanks
sure,
yeah
look
a
very
good
question
oliver
wilson
and
that
there
is
a
protocol
in
place
between
planning
on
building
control
and
the
aim
of
that
is
to
try
and
identify
early
and
on-site
breaches
of
planning
control,
and
so
by
early
I
mean
we
tried
to
pick
it
up
as
early
in
the
process
as
we
can.
G
What
the
protocol,
the
way
it
works
at
the
moment
is
building
control
will
send
us
nine
drawings.
Every
month,
it's
a
it's
a
sample
of
drawings
every
month
for
us
to
look
at
to
try
and
identify
any
breaches
between
what
they've
got
and
what
we've
got,
and
the
whole
idea
is
that
it's
it
acts
as
a
deterrent
and
sends
out
a
message
to
developers.
Look
what
we're
on
this
night,
and
so
you
need
to
be
very
careful
about
playing
one
set
against
the
other.
G
G
We
can't
place
absolutely
everything,
but
we
do
hope
that,
through
the
protocol
and
through
the
sample
of
drawings
that
we
receive
every
month
and
then
the
building
control
officers
when
they're
on
site
being
alert
to
possible
potential
breaches,
but
that
will
act
as
a
deterrent,
and
so
that's
what
we're
doing
at
the
moment.
This
one
obviously
didn't
fall
into
that
category
and
but
generally
we
are
doing.
We
are
done
our
best
with
building
control
to
try
and
deter
that
type
of
thing
from
happening.
D
Thank
you
thank
you,
damian
and,
and
just
on
the
points
from
alderman,
wilson
and
completely
agree.
Obviously,
there's
residents
here
being
a
very
difficult
situation,
and
I
guess
it's
just
to
clarify
from
mecca
I
take
it.
D
They
had
a
different
approval
than
what
they
actually
built
them,
much
more
graded
back
guards
of
surrounding
houses,
rather
than
this
mind,
as
I
suppose,
and
then
the
second
quarter
would
be,
I
know,
say:
for
example,
things
aren't
built
appropriately
planned
enforcement
is
taken,
and
these
kind
of
situations
that
plan
forcing
taking
on
that
essentially
the
bearer
of
the
homes
and
the
developer,
gets
away
with
it.
You
know
scot-free,
so
this
big
or
is
there
any
recourse
that
the
developer
you
know
can
be
forced
to?
D
You
know,
come
back
and
sort
of
miss
out
just
those
two
quick
queries.
AE
Thank
you,
chair.
There's,
two
issues.
Really.
I
suppose
the
the
the
level
of
the
house
is
slightly
higher,
so
it's
not
just
the
garden
so
between
the
level
of
the
highest
paying
higher
and
the
garden
is
actually
increased
and
they
must
have
actually
built
the
houses
behind
first
because
they're
quite
flat,
so
if
they
degraded
them
between
the
two,
it
may
well
have
not
seemed
such
such
a
significant
issue,
but
they
when
they've,
left
those
houses
to
the
end.
AE
Unfortunately,
that's
been
the
repercussions
of
it
and
that's
only
really
appeared
after
you
know
it
was
actually
finalized.
In
regards
to
what
was
the
second
question,
you'd
asked
about.
D
Just
regards
to
say,
for
example,
you
know
this
question
this
situation,
you
know
the
haven't
been
built.
The
plans
and
enforcement
actions
taken.
Is
that
taken
against
the
you
know,
the
new
purchasers
and
the
developer
gets
away
with
it
or
is
there
any
recourse
on
the
developer.
AE
In
this
case,
the
application
is
actually
made
by
the
developer,
so
it's
made
on
behalf
of
of
the
applicants,
but
the
recourse
would
actually
be
through
potentially
the
the
owner
of
the
property.
E
Yeah
thanks
john
thank
you
elizabeth
was
it
sure
elizabeth
and
for
and
I
have
to
commend
elizabeth.
Actually,
you
know
taking
it
this
far.
You
know
and
and
and
really
forcing
the
developers
hand.
Let's
be
honest,
she
went
through
a
a
a
a
timeline
there
where
she
was
being
ignored
and
she
didn't
give
up
and
I'd
say
many
in
in
a
similar
scenario,
probably
have
given
up,
but
hopefully
she
will
get
her
dream
home
and
she
will
be
able
to
enjoy
it
with
her,
her
family
and
kids
and
all.
E
But
I
suppose
my
question
is
and
again
nicola.
I
suppose
it's
just
because
it
you
know
we're
looking
at
on
the
screen
and
on
here
and
in
number
31
of
33
you
come
out
and
on
the
photograph.
It
shows
you
that
you're,
you
have
a
footpath
around
the
back
and
obviously
that's
not
changing,
and
then
there's
like
a
steps
down
onto
a
flat
area
down
is
that
is
the
fence
increasing
in
height
between
31
and
33
and
number
nine.
E
You
know
from
the
because
if
you
look
at
the
photograph
there,
you
know
the
one
there
with
with
shows
you'll
actually
see
into
the
the
backyards
should
still
be
able
to
see
into
the
back
garden.
So
you
know
if
you're
standing,
if
I
was
standing
up
a
path,
I'd,
be
able
to
look
down
into
those
people's
gardens
in
number
nine
and
number
ten.
Is
there
any
requirement?
E
Is
that
fence
coming
up
to
sort
of
give
that
bit
more?
Is
that
where
the
screens
are
these,
I
see
the
screens
are
on
the
pres.
It's
just
not
clear.
Obviously,
elizabeth
is
is
happy
with,
which
is
from
my
head
that
you
know
it.
It
will
do
what
is
going
to
do
and
then,
when
it's
done
she
goes,
I
wish
would
increase
that
fan
site.
But
just
if
you're
clarified.
AE
The
original
proposal
was
to
pick
a
2.55,
so
it
was
to
actually
put
a
wall
around
with
the
fence
on
the
top
of
it.
But
I
mean
there
was
a
severe
impact
on
some
of
the
properties
immediately
beside
it
specifically
number
three:
five,
nine
and
eleven
and
even
further
along
at
13
and
15.
They
would
have
they
would
have
had
some
of
their
fence
removed
and
a
wall
and
a
fence
put
in
through
half
of
their
site
and
then
continuing
with
their
normal
1.8
meter,
high
fence,
the
rest
of
it.
AE
So
and
no,
this
proposal
is
not
to
change
that
one
point:
it
meter
high
fence,
which
is
in
between
the
properties.
So
there
will
be
steps
down
and,
yes,
you
will
be
able
to
view
from
immediately
as
you
step
off
the
through
the
back
door
under
the
the
first
bit
of
patio,
but
the
garden
will
then
step
down
into
a
lower
area.
AE
Now
there
will
be
a
retaining
wall
inside
the
fence
line,
to
try
and
provide
that,
and
there
are
trellis
panels
being
proposed
in
terms
of
providing
landscaping
details
to
to
help
improve
the
privacy.
E
Answer
nixon
yeah
it
does,
and
I
just
I
just
want
to
tease
that
out
sure
you
know
for
elizabeth's
benefit
that
you
know,
because
I'm
six
foot
one.
If
I'm
staying
on
that
back
patio,
I
can
see
another
person's
garden.
You
know
and
that's
not
gonna
change
with
this
proposal.
So
look
that
it's
it's
an
improvement,
but
it
would
concern
me
to
be
honest
with
you.
If
I
lived
in
that
house.
I
Thank
you
chair,
and
can
I
concur
with
the
comments
from
counselor
nicholson?
What
elizabeth
has
told
us
this
afternoon
reference
this
application
and
this
the
difficulty
that
they've
had
here
is
a
family.
It
must
have
been
a
very
stressful
time
for
them.
I
certainly
hope
that
this
ends
up
and
it
will
be
to
their
satisfaction
and
enjoy
their
their
dream
home,
which
he
calls
it
and
like
everyone,
should
should
be
able
to
do
that.
I
It's
just
following
on
from
the
colleague
alimon
wilson
about
the
relationship
between
planning
on
the
lincoln
control
and
ebitda
damien.
Here
is
from
the
from
the
the
outset
foundation
level
and
everything
else.
Can
we
not
maybe
see
what
where
this
the
land
round
is
going
on?
Finally,
when
the
house
is
complete
or
near
completely,
there's
our
is
complete,
there's
a
building
control
certificate.
I
I
G
Yeah
thanks
cherry
thanks,
solomon
anderson
and
I
can't
speak
for
building
control
and
what
they
do
during
the
inspect
their
inspections.
To
be
perfectly
honest
with
you,
but
when
we
grant
permission
for
any
development,
you
know
it's
taken
that
that
development
will
be
implemented
in
accordance
with
the
approval,
and
that
doesn't
always
happen.
That's
this
is
an
example
of
that
and
fortunately
we
were
able
to
pick
that
up
through
planning
enforcement,
and
we
have
worked
very
hard,
as,
as
nikola
has
pointed
out,
to
try
and
address
that
we've
worked
with
the
agent
and
we've.
G
You
know
got
this
application
to
a
point
now
that
we
can't
recommend
approval
for
it.
So
that's
a
difficult
process,
it's
a
difficult
position
for
officers
to
find
themselves
in
because,
as
I
said,
we
grant
permission,
the
onus
is
on
the
developer
and
make
sure
they
implement
that
permission.
We
are
working
hard
with
bill
and
control.
We
just
send
a
message
out
to
developers
and
agents
that
we
are
watching
and
and
for
for
any
breaches
of
planning
control.
G
The
protocol
is
there
for
that
reason,
and
you
know
we're
happy
to
to
review
how
that's
working.
I
think
we're
intending
to
review
it
anyway
because
it
has
been
in
place
now
for
several
years
and
but
it
is
sending
out
the
right
message
that
planning
and
building
control
plans
have
got
to
match
up
and
if
they
don't,
then
we'll
pick
that
up
and
address
it.
I
Thanks
damian,
yes,
I
think
there
is
a
a
way
that
can
maybe
ensure,
instead
of
this
ending
up
with
enforcement.
If
there's,
I
know
and
planning
on
building
control
is
working
closely
together
and
then
there's
something
that
should
be
looked
at
here,
that
any
found
inspection
on
that
to
do
is
in
name
with
what
has
been
passed
or
what
has
been
planning.
I
That's
what
I'm
saying
here
that
if
that
tie-up
was
complete
at
the
end,
it
would
be
there
for
everyone
to
see
if
something
wasn't
right
and
therefore
it
could
be
fixed
at
that
time,
and
the
developer
would
be
compelled
to
do
that
before
he
got
a
sign
off
with
a
building
control,
to
figure
out
what
this
to
ensure
it
was
done,
and,
let's
see
without
a
case
like
this
happening
in
the
future.
That's
all
I'm
saying
here.
Thank
you.
J
Yes,
just
a
further
point
to
clarity,
a
ticket,
what
was
approved
initially
versus,
what's
there
as
an
assumption
to
make
that
the
layout
as
it
is
or
the
topography
it's
hard
to
keep
it
just
with
the
photographs,
but
was
this
to
avoid
in
some
way
reducing
levels
and
you
know
obviously
removing
earth
if
you
like
or
getting
that
level
down,
has
that
been
you
know?
Has
it
been?
You
know
as
the
developer
there
you
know.
Has
this
been
an
easier
route?
J
If
you
like,
in
terms
of
you,
know
excavation
I'm
not
telling
you
just
trying
to
get
my
head
right?
Why
you
know
someone
would
you
know,
leave
it
like
this?
If
you
understand
me,
is
that
a
fur
assumption
to
make?
But
it
was
you
know,
in
order
to
avoid
you
know,
a
level
drop
which
you
have
to
assume
is
a
fair
bit
of
work
with
material
the
disposal,
and
I'm
just
trying
to
get
my
head
around.
You
know
has
that
been
has
happened
the
case,
maybe
I'm
looking
like
a
non-slaughter
yourself.
AE
It
seems
to
be
that
they
they've
tried
to
build
the
site
up
slightly
more
towards
the
cycle
path.
You
know
to
try
to
keep
it
agreed
so
that
when
you're,
walking
or
cycling,
you
can
come
into
the
development
easier
rather
than
with
a
banker,
and
in
order
to
do
that,
they've
brought
it
up
slightly.
I
think
to
try
and
do
that.
So
it's
not
necessarily,
I
think,
they're
just
trying
to
work
around
the
constraints
immediately
beside
it,
but
didn't
realize
then
the
impact
that
that
potentially
would
have.
D
Okay,
thank
you
any
other
questions
of
queries,
members,
otherwise
I'll
move
into
the
big
stage.
Okay,
we'll
move
on
to
the
base
stage
well,
certainly,
and
certainly
raised
that
you
know
this
issue
about
that
gap
between
plan
and
building
control.
No
there
there
is
some
checks
there,
but
clearly
that's
one
step
to
three
and
maybe
others
have
as
well.
It's
just
that.
D
Maybe
you
know
the
the
plan
thing
could
go
away
from
this
and
obviously
consider
consider
listen.
Well
are
any
improvements
need
to
be
managed
on
that
process
to
try
and
further
limit
the
situation
on
the
application
itself?
I
have
complete
sympathy
with
the
you
know
the
speaker
here
and
the
residents
impacted
by
this,
because
it's
clearly
been
through
a
lot
of
emotional
stress
and
that's
applications.
Methods
been
trying
to
get
to
a
position
where
everyone
can
can
live
and
have
a
good
quality
of
life
rather
than
the
situation.
D
We
have
a
severe
severe
impact
on
these
numbers
arousing.
So,
given
that,
I
think
we
have
to
take
a
pragmatic
approach
and
on
the
prayer
of
this
recommendation,
you
know
that
was
outlined,
but
just
it's
highlighted
for
me
that
we
need
to
put
more
effort
into
you
know
watching
out
for
those
cowboys
out
there
who
maybe
cut
corners
or
build
mines
as
this
one's.
This
one's
come
out,
but
complete
sympathy
with
the
the
residents
in
this.
D
In
this
case,
and
that's,
I
think
that
the
recommendation
for
us
is
the
correct
one
I
know
was
a
fairly
pragmatic
approach.
Alderman
muslim.
J
J
That
we're
seeing
the
you
know
as
an
authority
to
to
back
those
efforts,
have
come
at
a
considerable
length
of
time
and
no
doubt
there'd
be
a
bit
of
money
to
be
spent
and
to
enact
these
works.
I
suppose
one
thing
I
feel
would
be
important.
J
Would
you
know
given
the
close
proximity
of
neighbors
and
that
to
this
I
think
it's
final,
that
maybe
there's
some
type
of
oversight
from
planners
or
building
control,
as
this
work
is
progressing
that
you
know,
we
aren't
in
a
situation
where
something's
made
worse
or
something
isn't
finished
as
is
required,
and
you
know
we're
leading
on
the
end
of
further
issues.
You
know
you
know
another
case
of
enforcement
based
on
this
latest
approval.
Should
it
be
given
tonight.
J
You
know,
I
think
we
do
need
to
be
learning
our
lessons
and
maybe
invest
in
a
small
amount
of
time
and
to
ensure
that
what
is
within
this
is
built
out
as
per
plan,
and
it's
done
in
a
respectful
way.
In
terms
of
you
know
the
neighbors,
and
because
obviously,
if
people
are
bought
their
homes,
their
gardens
are
level
and
they
are
content
enough,
and
this
work
is
is,
is
mitigating.
J
You
know
the
the
levels
on
a
number
of
other
houses
so
like
what
do
you
need
to
be
mindful
of
the
amenity
of
other
other
residents,
and
it's
all
done
in
in
a
sympathetic
manner,.
G
Yeah
thanks
chart
thanks
oliver
wilson
yeah.
I
I
do
absolutely
accept
the
comments
that
members
are
making
on
this
issue.
I
suppose
that
there
is
a
resource,
an
issue
here
in
terms
of
trying
to
to
place
absolutely
every
site.
You
know
I
think
eden
was
regarded,
but
you
know
them
at
every
inspection
they
make.
You
check
that
against
the
plumbing
drawings.
Could
there
be
resourcing
implications
there,
but
we
are
happy
to
explore
that?
That's
absolutely
it.
G
There
is
no
members,
also
a
number
one
prospective
occupier
prospective
purchasers
to
ensure
that
if
they
enter
into
some
sort
of
contract
to
purchase
a
property
off
plan
that
they
need
to
make
certain
as
well
that
that
that
it
is
built
in
accordance
with
that
plan
before
they
complete
the
contract,
because
you
know
this
isn't
the
only
case
for
this.
G
As
this
has
happened,
and
it
is,
there
is
a
responsibility
on
people
who
are
buying
a
property
in
consultation
with
their
legal
advisors
to
make
sure
that
whatever
it
is,
they
eventually
buy
it
matches
up
with
what
they
saw
in
the
plan
in
the
first
instance,
and
but
accept
your
comments
in
relation
to
what
planning
and
building
patrol
can
do
around
enforcement.
I'm
happy
to
follow
up
with
that.
E
Yeah,
german,
I
suppose
look
and
these
things
are
never
acceptable
and
at
least
this
developer
has
stood
up
and
I
suppose,
try
to
rectify
in
some
shape
or
form,
and
I
have
to
come
in
and
throw
back
damien.
I
think,
to
get
the
resource
to
check
every
house
that's
built
in
in
in
in
in
this
area.
I
I
think
it
would
scare
the
life
out
of
this
matter.
E
They
may
have
come
back
looking,
I
know
many
staffed
in
it
and
a
it
would
be,
but
I
do
think-
and
I
do
think
it
is
happening
as
demons
outlined,
because
I
have
experienced
it
myself-
that
there
is
a
there-
is
a
a
a
a
link
between
planning
and
building
control
at
the
minute.
No,
maybe
that
needs
taken
up
a
wee
bit
but,
as
I
say
like
sometimes
you
know,
building
control
come
out
and
spec
foundations
and
they
wouldn't
won't
be
back
out
until
the
house
is
finished.
E
The
buildings
will
rely
on
the
developer,
to
ring
and
and
bring
them
out
to
do
to
do
the
inspections
and
it
like
it's
tied
in
my
mortgage
payments,
and
things
like
that.
So
I
I
do
think
that
you
know
that
this
is
an
unfortunate
situation,
but
I
do
think
it's
you
know
it's
not.
Thankfully,
it's
not
common
that
I'm
aware
of
anyway,
you
might
have
a
different
opinion
out
there,
but
I
think
this
is.
E
This
is
one
of
the
extremes
I
think
in
in
relation
to
what
what's
what's
happened,
but
you
know,
as
I
say
it's
it's
probably
as
good
as
we
get
at
this
stage
of
the
game.
You
know
so
thanks
john.
D
D
I
I'm
I'll
be
to
type
in
the
recommendation.
Thank
you.
D
Okay
proposal,
berlin,
wilson,
second
by
alderman
anderson,
to
accept
the
recommendation
and
the
other
supposed
proposals-
members,
not
similarly,
okay,
members
are
all
agreed
in
that
proposal.
D
Okay,
so
that's
that
one
approved
and
I'd
just
like
to
thank
elizabeth
for
taking
part
in
the
prominent
committee
saving
wishes
over
the
sphere.
Even
okay,
I'm
a
mature
player
on
so
we're
in
that
pandex
sex
application.
Number
la
08,
20,
21,
slash
one
three:
five,
seven
slash
f
just
have
to
declare
that
it
was
contacted
by
a
member
about
the
alleged
public
right-of-way
in
this
location.
D
D
Okay,
so
just
check
the
research
in
there.
So
hannah
will
teach
you
mcavoy
senior,
planning,
officer,
presenter,
important,
powerpoint
presentation.
P
The
reason
the
applications
before
the
plan
regularly
service
committee
is
because
it's
a
major
application
proposed
development
is
in
connection
with
serous
plastics.
You
process
polythene
granules
into
thin
gauge
polyethylene
tubing,
which
then
make
into
bags
or
silt
into
sheeting
for
use
in
automatic
packaging
machines.
P
The
application
takes
retrospective
planning
permission
for
the
extended
yard
area,
with
its
associated
fancy
gates
and
access,
which
is
to
be
used
as
parking
and
marshalling
area
for
traders.
As
an
external
storage
area,
commissioners
also
sought
further
attention
of
the
completed
machine
store
extension
to
the
existing
factory
building
and
for
a
new
proposed
extension
to
the
existing
factory
to
include
an
extrusion
hall
and
raw
material
store,
a
new
proposed
ancillary
recycling,
building,
blower,
plant
building
and
additional
storage
tanks.
P
The
raw
materials
store
will
supplement
the
existing
external
storage
area,
that
is
to
be
relocated
within
the
art
of
the
site
and
the
relax
recycling
building
will
accommodate
the
recycling
area
that
is
currently
within
the
main
factory
building
and
is
being
displaced
to
make
way
for
a
post,
extrusion
hall.
The
machine
store
has
been
constructed
and
used
as
a
shelter
to
accommodate
the
existing
machinery.
P
On
the
site,
in
order
to
improve
security
and
reduce
weathering,
the
extension
and
buildings
have
been
designed
to
integrate,
with
existing
industrial
buildings
on
the
application
site
and
within
the
wider
corn
industrial
state,
with
silver
colored
profile
cloud
and
external
walls
over
a
concrete
facing
block
base,
which
are
the
same
material
finishes
of
the
majority
of
the
main
factory
building
that
currently
occupies
the
application
site
proposed
boundary
fences.
Also
in
keeping
with
existing
fencing,
the
two
established
accesses
serving
the
site
for
pesky
drive
will
continue
to
be
used.
P
P
The
post,
extrusion
hall
extension
largely
will
accommodate
an
automated
on
an
automated
area
and
result
in
only
a
small
increase
in
staff
and
goods
vehicles.
Five
and
one
respectively,
the
proposed
recycling
billing
will
accommodate
the
existing
unit
uses
that
will
be
replaced
by
the
extrusion
hall.
The
machine
store
is
a
shelter
for
existing
machinery
previously
stored
in
the
in
the
open
and
will
not
create
any
additional
parking
demand.
The
blower
plant,
building
and
storage
tanks
will
not
contribute
to
any
additional
staff
or
other
buildings.
P
The
existing
staff
of
visitor
car
parking
proposes
to
be
increased
by
six
to
accommodate
the
increase
in
parking
demand
created
by
the
development.
The
post
parking
in
marston
yard
area
also
provides
additional
trailer
parking
area
level
access
to
prevail
and
respective
access
for
the
disabled.
For
those
with
impaired
mobility,
the
factory
currently
operates
24
hours
per
day
over
seven
days
per
week
and
maintains
a
constant
manufacturing
production
of
plastic
products
for
onward
export.
The
nearest
sense
of
receptors
from
the
site
is
18
meters
away.
P
A
noise
impact
assessment
of
smelting
concludes
of
the
cure
of
impact
from
the
existing
factor
in
the
post.
Development
is
lower
than
the
background
sound
of
the
existing
industrial
sites.
At
present,
other
material
consideration,
including
drainage,
non-contamination
assessments,
wastewater
treatment,
works,
network
capacity,
an
appropriate
assessment
have
all
been
appraised
for
the
statutory
relevant
authorities
and
no
objections,
subject
to
the
conditions
attached
have
been
received.
P
An
old
pathway
extended
through
this
site,
which
was
removed
following
the
extension
to
the
order
officers,
have
carried
out
consultation
with
the
right
of
ware
officer
right
of
ways
officer
within
the
council,
and
it's
been
confirmed
that
this
is
not
an
established
public
right-of-way.
Furthermore,
the
efi
roads
have
confirmed
this
was
never
an
adopted
pathway.
P
P
Officers
recommend
one
further
condition.
The
development
here
by
permitted
shall
only
be
used
for
the
purposes
which
are
ancillary
to
the
primary
use
of
the
state,
is
class
b3
use
and
shall
not
be
saver
to
become
a
separate,
independent
operation,
and
the
reason
for
that
is
to
ensure
the
development
is
used
ancillary
to
the
existing
development
of
the
site
and
to
control
the
future
use
of
the
site.
P
Having
regard
to
above
and
after
undertaking
a
policy
assessment
and
planning
balancing
exercise
officer
of
the
pin
in
the
post
development
complies
with
the
area
plan.
The
spps
and
all
other
relevant
planning
policies
on
this
basis
and
subjective
conditions
attached
and
it's
recommended
the
plan
information
be
granted.
P
So
there's
the
post
elevation.
So
it's
in
keeping
with
the
the
existing
materials
and
heights
of
the
of
the
development
of
the
present
time
and
that's
the
proposed
floor
plan.
So
it's
normally
to
the
south,
the
site
away
from
the
ascii
drive
area.
That's
just
an
elevation
treatment
and
plan
of
the
storage
tank.
P
P
That's
photograph
two:
it's
actually
down
a
past
the
dvla
in
regards
to
these
footpaths
that
went
through
the
industrial
area.
You
can
see.
The
part
of
them
are
closed
off.
Our
site
is
to
the
further
to
the
north
of
that,
and
so
part
of
these
paths
that
were
investigated
as
part
of
this
application.
P
D
D
No
questions
or
queries
was
the
only
one
I
had
was
in
relation
to
that
right
away,
but,
as
I
said,
I
think
it
was
under
under
investigation.
It
was
something
came
to
the
leisure
committee
and
it
didn't
make
the
legislation.
D
So
I
don't
know
if
there's
much
we
can
do
on
that
any
questions
or
queries.
Members.
L
Thank
you
chairman,
and
really
just
to
say
that
we've
got
to
welcome
this
development
and
further
development.
I
should
say
of
an
industry,
that's
already
in
place
and
doing
extremely
well,
and
I
think
we
need
to
welcome.
I
know
there
are
the
issues
about
pathways
and
so
on,
but
it's
clear
that
the
whole
thing's
being
investigated
and
really
this
is
an
absolute
wonderful
development
for
the
whole
carn
estate
area.
So
I
think
we
welcome
this.
D
It's
remembered
from
the
question
stage
any
questions,
nothing
items
moving
through
the
bed
stage.
Any
views
on
this
country
nicholson.
E
Yeah
and
chairman,
like
ian
shania,
you
know
a
superb
report,
there's
nothing
in
it,
everything!
Sorry,
you
need
to
know
and
as
always,
what
tribal
said.
It's
an
established
business,
a
successful
business
in
this.
In
this
corner
area
and
and
as
I
said,
it
does
seem
to
be
a
very
well
put
together
application
and
the
plan
officers
have
really
you
know
gone
through
all
the
detail.
That's
required,
and
you
know
I'm
sort
of
pretty
generally
happy
chairman
with
what's
in
front
of
me.
So
that's
my
top
one.
Thank
you.
J
J
When
it
is
submitted-
and
we
can
see
here-
the
investments,
3.2
million
construction,
employment
and
the
reason
100
job
years,
so
one
job
year-
is
one
full-time
job
for
a
year
and
that's
impressive
and
obviously
the
continued
operational
employment
of
20
to
30
jobs.
So
to
me
and
an
obligation,
that's
available
information,
and
I
guess
you
know
it's
a
lesson
others
could
learn
in
terms
of
and
the
submission
information
to
this
committee,
because
it
does
have
a
bearing
on
our
considerations
of
it.
D
Thank
you,
oldman
wilson,
yeah
suppose.
My
staff,
I
know,
would
have
had
had
some
sympathy
in
terms
of
the
public
right
away
as
she
so
was
appropriate
that
you
know
the
public
right-of-way
officer
carried
out
that
you
know
their
investigation
and
although
ultimately,
it
did
not
meet
a
legislative
criteria
to
be
enforced,
it's
actually
quite
well.
D
I
don't
know
if
interesting,
it's
going
to
be
not
the
right
word,
but
it's
interesting
to
me
and
that
bombard
new
bomb
bridge
council
area
were
actually
very
proactive
in
terms
of
laying
down
public
right-of-ways
where
they
are
down
28.
I
think
I
recall
in
craig
alvin
that
was
only
four
and
the
normal.
It
was
zero.
So
you
know:
public
right-of-ways
are
quite
good,
particularly
coming
to
the
active
travel
agenda,
and
things
allows
all
alternative
travel
rates.
D
Okay,
I'll
move
on
to
the
proposal
stage
and
proposals
on
this
one
members,
ultimate
bible.
D
Okay,
I'm
members
of
the
proposal
from
alderman
anderson
second
by
councillor,
nicholson
to
approve
the
recommendation
on
the
other
proposals.
Nope,
not
cla
members,
so
well
agreed,
not
one.
Okay,
we're
all
great
well!
Thank
you.
Thank
you
richard
for
waiting
all
that
time.
Maybe
we
should
have
asked
you
a
couple
of
questions
because
I
said
the
report
is
all
there.
D
AA
AA
AA
I
can
advise
that
no
objections
were
received
in
relation
to
the
proposal
and
all
consultation
responses
are
favorable.
Officers
are
of
the
opinion.
The
proposal
meets
the
requirements
of
policy
and
the
recommended
members
grant
consent.
Subject
to
the
conditions
outlined
in
the
report
and
I'll
just
take
you
through
the
presentation.
AA
So
we're
in
the
center
of
our
mod
just
north
of
the
mall
next
slide.
That's
our
site
location
plan
next
slide.
Please
that's
our
aerial
photograph
that
shows
the
campus
when
it
was
under
construction.
Next
slide,
please.
So
this
is
taken
from
the
longsdale
road
looking
directly
at
the
front
elevation
the
next
slide.
This
is
taken
further
up
the
long
stale
road
looking
back,
and
you
can
see
the
courthouse
in
that
on
that
photograph
next
slide.
Please
that's
slightly
further.
Along
and
again
the
courthouse
there
is
in
the
center
of
the
picture.
AA
This
is
then
taken
from
the
the
other
direction.
Looking
north
and
the
stone
wall
here
right
there
is
the
the
cartilage
of
the
the
courthouse
looking
back
towards
the
campus
building.
This
is
our
proposed
elevations.
So
essentially,
what
they're
proposing
is
a
large
tv
on
the
the
front
of
it
and
that's
our
artist
impression
as
to
what
it's
going
to
look
like.
AA
E
I
don't
know
what
to
say
is
treaty's
hostess,
but
that
wouldn't
fit
in
my
living
room
now,
chairman
look
basically
again
and
did
a
report,
but
the
the
the
conservation
area
truly
and
the
reason
I
asked
the
question,
as
you
probably
know
is
you
know
it
doesn't
stop
at
the
courthouse
on
the
kurdish
wall.
Yeah!
That's!
Okay!
Thank
you.
So
sorry
to
take
the
conservation
here,
the
site.
AA
Yes,
thank
you
chair.
Yes,
it's
outside
the
conservation
boundary
and
we
did
because
of
the
nature
of
this,
where
it
set
back.
We
didn't
feel
that
it
had
any
impact
on
the
conservation,
so
the
main
consideration
was
the
list
of
building.
AA
D
E
Yeah
again
charlotte,
it's
it's
a
well
put
together
application
and
these
things
are
part
of
society.
Now
these
big
led
screens
we've
seen
one
imported
that
was
passed
by
this
committee.
So
look
it's
it's
something
that
obviously
at
nighttime
will
people
will
see
what's
what's
going
on
the
college
and
stuff,
so
I
suppose
really
it's
it's
part
and
parcel
of
the
overall
fabric
of
of
their
offer.
So
I
have
no
real
issues
to
it.
Thank
you.
D
E
D
D
Okay,
my
patrol
agreed
panic,
seven
okay,
last
but
not
least
appendix
here
application
number
earlier,
2021
slash
one
three:
three:
nine:
do
you
see
it
at
this
charge
of
condition,
just
making
sure
yep
and
eamonn
lockery
is
in
the
chat,
but,
firstly,
a
handover
tuition
need
to
take
us
through
the
report.
P
P
Hpk
architects
has
prepared
a
landscape
management
and
maintenance
plan.
The
own
objectives
of
the
landscape
proposals
and
landscape
management
plan
is
to
develop
a
high
quality
landscape
scheme
that
will
enhance
the
media
environment
of
the
development
for
the
benefit
of
all
users.
The
appointed
landscape
contractor
responsible
for
all
maintenance
and
replacement
of
the
lifetime.
The
development,
on
the
basis
of
the
information
submitted
officer,
content
to
post
development
accords
with
the
spps,
such
as
condition
number
nine
of
planning
application
la
we
had
20
21,
13
1371
f
can
be
discharged
future.
P
P
That's
in
our
lights
on
our
hands
up
so
I'll
move
into
the
date
stage.
I
need
views
on
some
members,
I'm
not
seeing
any
lights
on
the
hands
up
somewhere
in
the
proposal
stage.
Members
and
proposals
on
this
one,
oh
both
put
them.
On
the
same
time.
I
think
country
nicholson.
You
were
first.
P
Yeah
char,
hopefully
to
accept
the
recommendation
thanks
for
savage.
P
P
Okay,
remember
so
it's
just
left
me
to
thank
everyone
for
participating,
so
I'd
like
to
thank
head
department,
I'd
like
to
thank
legal
officers
founding
officers,
I'd
like
to
thank
our
ik
team.
Thank
yourselves
members,
I'd
like
to
thank
all
those
who
intended
to
make
contributions
for
and
against
various
applications.
P
I'd
like
to
thank
our
democratic
services
officer
ruth,
but
last
night
members
I'd
like
to
give
a
special
tribute
to
democratic
services,
officer
louise,
as
as
members
know,
this
is
the
way
he's
last
made
before
she
moves
and
turned
the
plan
in
row
within
a
different
plan
on
time
and
that
it's
a
loss
to
a
committee.
Louise
has
given
fantastic
service
both
to
us
all
as
members
and
in
particular
to
the
committee
I'll
have
to
say
she
almost
runs
this
committee.
P
All
we
have
to
do
is
turn
up
the
agenda's,
always
all
sorted
everyone's
always
contacted
and
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
need
to
be
contacted
and
silent
and
it's
absolutely
fantastic
work.
So
I
just
like
asked
the
vice
chair
to
come
forward
and
just
give
a
small
token,
so
give
a
small
token
of
our
appreciation
to
the
ways
and
and
everything
she's
done
at
boiler's
committee.
P
Well,
hopefully,
we'll
we'll
still
see
you
but
again,
spikes
used
to
fill
but
we're
lucky
and
that
I
will
have
ruth
who
will
be
taking
over
from
from
the
ways
so
we're
we're
we're
still
in
good
we're
still
in
good
hands
below
than
that
numbers.
Okay,
so
that
that's
us
I'd
like
to
wish
us
all:
safe
home
and
good
night
hawaii
alaska
plan,
our
lighting
officer
to
turn
off
the
lights.