Agenda item

Report of the Assistant Director Planning.

Purpose of report

To advise the Committee on how the Council is responding to the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Review of Planning Committee Decision Making.

Recommendations

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee resolves:

1.1         To note the work in progress in responding to the PAS recommendations and advice.

1.2         To identify any comments for consideration by the Executive.

Resolved

(1)          That the Response to the Planning Advisory Service: Review of Planning Committee Decision Making report be noted.

(2)          That Executive be advised that Overview and Scrutiny support the suggestion from PAS that consideration be given to dispensing with the questions stage before a debate (para 6.1 of the PAS report)

The Committee considered a report of the Assistant Director Planning that aimed to advise the Committee on how the Council was responding to the Planning Advisory Service review of Planning Committee decision making.

In introducing the report, the Portfolio Holder for Planning & Development Management explained that a review of the Council’s decision-making on planning applications for major developments was undertaken in 2025 by the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) which formed part of the Local Government Association (LGA). Members were advised that the review was undertaken for the period April 2022 to March 2024, due to the percentage of the Council’s decisions overturned at appeal having slightly exceeded the nationally prescribed threshold of 10%.

Members were advised that the review concluded that the Council had an effective planning committee with professional, knowledgeable officers and members who understood planning issues and the importance of following officer advice. However, a number of recommendations were made in the interest of improvement;

• Improve early member engagement at pre-application stage
• Standardise and strengthen site visit procedures
• Introduce 24 Hour cut-off period prior to committee for late submissions
• Increase member involvement in planning appeals
• Improve understanding of planning enforcement
• Enhance clarity of officer reports as well as required considerations
• Strengthen member training programme
• Reintroduce developers’ forum
• Review legal representation at committee

In response to a question regarding decisions that go against officer recommendation and the resulting appeal determination, the Portfolio Holder for Planning & Development Management explained that PAS concluded that members were overly influenced by local objection and not evidence-based planning considerations in their decision making process.

In response to a question regarding the removal of a questions section before debate within Planning Committee meetings to allow for a more natural flow of questions and debate, the Portfolio Holder for Planning & Development Management explained that this had been considered but consensus amongst members and officers was mixed, and that the potential introduction of pre-meetings could help alleviate the volume of questions asked within the meetings.

In response to a question regarding member participation in Planning Committee as well as pre-committee site visits for members who were  in full time employment, and whether consideration could be made for such members, the Portfolio Holder for Planning & Development Management explained that due to the technical intricacies of planning applications and their impact on the length of committees resulted in meetings needed to be held earlier in the day to allow time for full consideration of applications brought before members.

In response to a question regarding the involvement of Parish Councils at the pre-application stage, the Portfolio Holder for Planning & Development Management explained that due to the confidentiality of applications at the pre-application stage, involvement was restricted. Members were advised that officers were working on the possibility of ward members involvement at pre-application stage, to better articulate localised issues and requirements.

In response to a question as to whether planning forums and training could be made available to all members of the council and not limited to Planning Committee members, the Assistant Director Planning explained that internal and developer planning forums were already open to all members, and that officers would ensure any training provided would also be open to all members, should they wish to attend.

In response to a question regarding the criteria for approving applications for development on land prone to flooding, the Head of Development Management explained that for applications on such sites, officers would consult with the Environment Agency, the local flood authority and the local draining provider, and a flood risk assessment would be carried out to assess whether the site would be acceptable for development.

It was proposed by Councillor Wood and Seconded by Councillor Thornhill that the Committee support the suggestion from PAS that consideration be given to dispensing with the questions stage before a debate (para 6.1 of the PAS report), and it be forwarded to the Executive for consideration.

Resolved

(1)          That the Response to the Planning Advisory Service: Review of Planning Committee Decision Making report be noted.

(2)          That Executive be advised that Overview and Scrutiny support the suggestion from PAS that consideration be given to dispensing with the questions stage before a debate (para 6.1 of the PAS report)