The Interim Head of Planning introduced the report as set-out in the agenda papers.  She drew attention to Appendix III which set out the proposed changes following the Planning and Transportation Policy Working Group meeting on 19 September 2023, and also guided Members through the table set out on page 152 of the agenda papers.

The Chair invited Members to ask questions and make comments, and points raised included:

·         Thanked officers for taking on board some of the comments made at the last meeting;

·         agreed in principle to the changes as too many very small planning applications were brought to the Planning Committee;

·         considered the latest draft went a little too far the other way;

·         with reference to paragraph 2.8.13.2, considered the amended paragraph (d) was too prescriptive;

·         clarification sought on the wording of ‘relevant’ in paragraph 2.8.15.2(b) and questioned whether the Head of Planning should be given the final decision;

·         the Council was a Member-led administration, not officer-led, and if a councillor wanted an application to be called-in to the Planning Committee, they should have the right to do so;

·         considered parish councillors were more knowledgeable now of the reasons that applications were referred to the Planning Committee, and these referrals should be permitted, without the decision being made by the Head of Planning as to whether the application be considered by the Committee;

·         welcomed that interested parties could speak again when the application came back to the Planning Committee after being deferred to the Planning Working Group;

·         agreed that votes were recorded;

·         noted the wording in the case of householder applications, but some might have an impact on the wider environment;

·         clarification sought on small commercial applications;

·         noted that the Constitution made reference to Member engagement when Enforcement action was to be taken, but was silent when no action was the proposed officer outcome;

·         clarification sought on householder applications going to Planning Committee when the householder was a Member or an officer; and

·         considered the wording needed to be amended to read that any representations were based on relevant national and local policy.

In response, the Interim Head of Planning explained that the professional  opinion of the Head of Planning would be a collective decision in consultation with case officers.  She explained that small commercial applications could still be called-in to the Planning Committee, and in terms of Enforcement action she explained that this had been discussed by officers as part of the early drafting of the Enforcement Local Plan, and was planned to be proposed to the Planning and Transportation Policy Working Group for change.  This would be accelerated.  

Councillor James Hunt moved the following amendment:  That under paragraph 2.8.15.2(b), the wording be changed to:  Provided that any such representations are, in the professional opinion of the Head of Planning, based upon relevant national and local planning policy.  This was seconded by Councillor Mike Whiting.  On being put to the vote, the amendment was agreed.

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the recommendation, and this was seconded by Councillor Tony Winckless.

Recommended:

(1)      That the proposed changes to the Scheme of Delegation and Committee Procedure Rules, as set out in Appendix 3, be considered by the Constitution Working Group, with the following additional amendment: That under paragraph 2.8.15.2(b), the wording be changed to:  Provided that any such representations are, in the professional opinion of the Head of Planning, based upon relevant national and local planning policy.