Issue - meetings

There are two pieces of supplementary information relating to this item:

Proposed addition to the Council’s Constitution:

Code of Conduct and Guidance for Members of the Planning Committee – Section 6 ‘Decision Making’ – Paragraph 6.7

“In considering an application for planning permission, there shall not, on the first consideration of the application, be a refusal of permission against an officer`s  recommendation in the committee report for approval, and any such motion shall be deemed to be a motion of `minded to refuse` and consideration of that application will be deferred to the next meeting of the Planning Committee

In considering the application at the subsequent meeting of the Planning Committee, only officers and members of the committee will be allowed to speak on the application.

The Planning Committee may at this subsequent meeting determine to grant permission either unconditionally or subject to conditions, or to refuse the application, in accordance with section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990”

Updated financial implications:

5.         FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS (AW)

The Table at 5.2 has been amended to include the 2016/17 financial year to date, as at the 25 July.

* This is in relation to one appeal that has not been decided as yet, the costs are those incurred to date. Total costs expected by planning to defend this appeal are estimated to range from £20,000 to £25,000.

Consideration was given to a report which proposed changes to the operation of the Planning Committee. Councillor Bray announced that all members of his group who were not members of the Planning Committee would be nominated as substitutes. Councillor Hall named Councillors Boothby, Morrell, Nickerson and himself as substitutes. A member expressed concern that there was already the facility to be ‘minded to refuse’ an application on deferring it. In response to a member’s question, it was clarified that, when a deferred item was brought back to the following meeting, there would be no restriction on members speaking on the application.

On the motion of Councillor Rooney, seconded by Councillor Ward, it was

RESOLVED –

(i)            The necessary amendments to the Constitution be approved, with all members being able to speak when the matter returned to the committee;

(ii)           The arrangements for briefings, site visits and the operation of the committee be approved;

(iii)          The proposal to trial the introduction of video footage as part of the officer presentation be approved;

(iv)         The Nolan Principles be noted;

(v)          The operation and effectiveness of the Planning Committee be reviewed annually.