Issue - meetings

The Council considered a report on the findings of the Planning Committee Review Working Group, which had been established by the Executive in 2021, to consider the LGA/PAS Planning Committee Peer Review recommendations and other improvement needs, and to make recommendations as appropriate to the Executive, Planning Committee and full Council.

The working group had met on six occasions to consider the 12 recommendations.  The report included details of the working group’s discussion against each recommendation and their own recommended response to each of the recommendations. 

As most of the recommendations arising from the review affected the operation of the Planning Committee, the report had been referred initially to that Committee for comments at its special meeting held on 7 February 2023.  The Committee’s response to each of the working group’s recommendations was also included in the report. 

At its meeting earlier in the day, the Executive had considered the report on this matter and had endorsed the wording of the motion proposed by the Lead Councillor for Planning Development, Legal and Democratic Services, Councillor Tom Hunt, and seconded by the Deputy Leader of the Council, Councillor Joss Bigmore, which was set out in the Order Paper. 

During the debate, some councillors expressed concerns over:

·       the proposed revised process for referral of applications to the Planning Committee and consequential increase in councillors’ workloads

·       availability of planning officers to meet with ward councillors to discuss planning applications   

·       the absence of an automatic speaking slot for parish councils at Planning Committee

·       the inability of a ward councillor to raise concerns after the 21-day period has expired

·       the possibility that Chairman of the Planning Committee and Executive Head of Service could refuse almost every referral request without any means of challenging any such refusal

Following the debate, the Council

RESOLVED:  That, taking into account the comments and recommendations made by the Planning Committee Review Working Group and the Planning Committee in response to the recommendations of the Planning Committee Peer Review undertaken by the Local Government Association with the Planning Advisory Service, the Council agrees the following actions:

(1)        That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R1: (Provide greater certainty in planning process by ensuring decision making conforms with planning policies and material planning considerations acting on behalf of the whole Guildford community and ensuring that there is clear separation between ward level responsibilities and decision-making role on Committee), a regular (monthly) planning training programme, be reinstated via MS Teams, subject to the proviso that whilst the planning training programme would be regular, there might not on all occasions be training every month.

(2)        That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R2: (Explore ways to rebuild trust and confidence between officers and Members. Consider running an independently facilitated workshop to be held between officers and Members, separate to the Planning Committee meeting, to better understand their roles, issues, and concerns), an Officer/Member Workshop be held following the elections in May 2023.

(3)        That, in response to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 134

Decision:

That, taking into account the comments and recommendations made by the Planning Committee Review Working Group and the Planning Committee in response to the recommendations of the Planning Committee Peer Review undertaken by the Local Government Association with the Planning Advisory Service, the Council is recommended to agree the following actions:

(1)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R1: (Provide greater certainty in planning process by ensuring decision making conforms with planning policies and material planning considerations acting on behalf of the whole Guildford community and ensuring that there is clear separation between ward level responsibilities and decision-making role on Committee), a regular (monthly) planning training programme, be reinstated via MS Teams, subject to the proviso that whilst the planning training programme would be regular, there might not on all occasions be training every month.

(2)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R2: (Explore ways to rebuild trust and confidence between officers and Members. Consider running an independently facilitated workshop to be held between officers and Members, separate to the Planning Committee meeting, to better understand their roles, issues, and concerns), an Officer/Member Workshop be held following the elections in May 2023.

(3)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R3: (Examine ways for Planning Committee and relevant officers to discuss and learn from appeal decisions to ensure that decisions on planning applications are undertaken, on behalf of the whole Guildford borough community, in a fair, impartial, and transparent way. The present system tagged onto the end of often long Planning Committees is not conducive to creating a learning atmosphere), quarterly appeal review sessions be held via MS Teams and facilitated by the Executive Head of Planning Development, noting that details of Appeal Decisions would continue to be included on Planning Committee agendas.

(4)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R4: (Review Planning Committee reports to see if further explanation can be given on the weight to be afforded to the Local and Neighbourhood Plan policies as well as material planning considerations such as the National Planning Policy Framework), appropriate mechanisms were in place already through which councillors could query policy weight afforded to particular proposals, noting that weight to be afforded to Local and Neighbourhood Plans and other material planning considerations would be covered in the training programme.

(5)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R5: (Ensure planning officers and Committee members are more aware of the impact of what a lack of housing delivery has on the weight given to Local Plan policies and kept appropriately updated on the work of the Housing Delivery Board), the topic of housing delivery be addressed as part of the Planning Committee training programme, which should include an overview of the Land Availability Assessment.

(6)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R6: (Review the opportunity for further guidance in the form of a supplementary planning document to help guide new high quality and sustainable development), in view of the  ...  view the full decision text for item 86

The Executive considered the report that set out the findings and recommendations of Planning Review Working Group.

The Council had originally scheduled a Planning Committee Peer Review to be undertaken by the Local Government Association (LGA) with the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) in March 2020, but this was postponed due to the Coronavirus pandemic.  The Peer Review was rescheduled and took place in early November 2020, following which the LGA published their final report which included 12 recommendations for the Council to consider. The report was circulated to all councillors.

In January 2021 the Executive responded to the LGA/PAS recommendations by convening a Planning Committee Review Working Group which was to consider and respond to those peer review recommendations along with some other pertinent matters. The Working Group met six times in total and presented its findings to the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee on 19 January and a special meeting of the Planning Committee on 7 February 2023 where a number of amendments were made. The recommendations resulting from that consultation were set out in the Executive’s Supplementary Information Sheet

The Executive was asked by the Lead Councillor for Planning Development, Legal and Democratic Services to consider the recommendations of the Working Group and the Planning Committee and, if agreeable, to refer these on to full Council for adoption.

The Chairman of the Planning Committee was in attendance and endorsed the recommendations.

It was explained that recommendation 4 (R4) had not been put forward for adoption as the council already took account of the materiality of planning policy and neighbourhood plans routinely within the planning reports. It was noted that the recommendations included an alternative and more transparent process to the ‘huddle’ at Planning Committee which was welcomed. Recommendation 7 (R7) had caused much discussion amongst councillors during consultation but was described as a necessary change in procedure to enable the council to make progress in processing a backlog of applications and to deliver an improved service going forward. A 12-month review was also welcomed.

Everyone involved in arriving at the final draft of recommendations were thanked for their input by the Chairman and officers were commended for the report.

RESOLVED:

That, taking into account the comments and recommendations made by the Planning Committee Review Working Group and the Planning Committee in response to the recommendations of the Planning Committee Peer Review undertaken by the Local Government Association with the Planning Advisory Service, the Council is recommended to agree the following actions:

(1)   That, in response to the LGA/PAS Recommendation R1: (Provide greater certainty in planning process by ensuring decision making conforms with planning policies and material planning considerations acting on behalf of the whole Guildford community and ensuring that there is clear separation between ward level responsibilities and decision-making role on Committee), a regular (monthly) planning training programme, be reinstated via MS Teams, subject to the proviso that whilst the planning training programme would be regular, there might not on all occasions be training every month.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86

The Chairman advised that there was some crossover between this item of business and the next item relating to the review of the probity in planning handbook.  Both items proposed identical changes to be made to the seven-day notice procedure and to the procedure for Councillors wishing to overturn officer recommendations at the Planning Committee.  The Committee agreed to consider those changes as part of this item only, so to prevent any duplication of debate.  The Chairman also explained that she would take the Committee through each of the eleven substantive recommendations which would be voted on separately by the Committee. 

The comments and recommendations of this Committee would be reported to the Executive at its special meeting on 22 February followed by an Extraordinary meeting of the Council on the same date.  The Committee were also asked to note the supplementary late sheets which detailed a proposed amendment to the process for Councillor Call-up which added a provision within the process to allow a councillor to withdraw any request to refer an application to the Committee.  In addition, a flowchart had been produced detailing how the new Call-Up process would work. 

The Executive Head of Planning Development, Gilian Macinnes introduced the item.  The Committee noted that the report had sought its comments on the recommendations of the Planning Committee Review Working Group in advance of its referral to Executive and then full Council.  The Working Group had been set up to consider the LGA Peer Review of the Planning Committee and the eleven recommendations that had already been referred to.  These covered essential training, learning from appeal decisions, increasing planning and policy knowledge and also the Planning Committee referral system, which would remove the 7-day notification procedure and replace it with a front loaded 21 day call up procedure which would engage members early in the process.  This would ensure the most effective and efficient approach to determining planning applications whilst ensuring that members had the opportunity to become involved at the early stages of the planning application journey.  Recommendation 9 which related to the member overturn process sought to ensure, when it was apparent to the Chairman during the debate on a planning application, that members felt that there should be an alternative motion, the Chairman would ask for an alternative motion that focussed on the harm or the benefits of a scheme.  Councillors would then be asked to vote on each of the reasons that related to the identified harm or benefit.  This would give greater strength to the decision of the Committee and make it more robust and defensible.

The Lead Councillor for Planning, Legal and Democratic Services, Councillor Tom Hunt stated that the changes proposed reflected a more transparent and accountable planning process which would assist in reducing the planning application backlog and improve upon the proportion of applications considered within the statutory timeline.   

The Committee was invited to make comments on the following recommendations made by the Working Group:

R1 (initial recommendation of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5