Agenda item

The Service Group Manager presented the report about temporary changes to the Scheme of Delegation, recommending to the Committee to agree the proposals therein, with a view to review them after a period of three months. 

Illustrative sketches of the current and proposed schemes to demonstrate to the Committee the importance of continuing with the determination of all valid planning applications were presented.  It was stated that the proposed changes would be made alongside revisions to the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement, which would be considered at a meeting of the Mayor and Cabinet on 10 June 2020.

The Committee noted the report, and the addendum to it.  It was recognised that due to the temporary postponement of planning committee meetings as a result of the lockdown created by the Covid-19 crisis, a backlog of planning applications requiring determination had arisen.

In discussing the recommendations, Members felt that the number of outstanding applications collated within the two months’ period since the lockdown were excessive, but acknowledged that the proposals would enable the Council to meet its duty in determining all valid planning applications submitted to it.  Members understood that failure do so within the timescale prescribed by the Government could result in applicants lodging appeals against the Council with the Planning Inspector on the grounds of non-determination.

Continuing with their discussion, Members sought clarifications about the intensions and potential implications of the proposed changes.  They expressed a view that the proposals should not distract from plans to consult and engage more widely with the community in light of a recommendation by the Local Democracy Group (LDG) to reform the Council’s planning decision-making.  Members stated that in view of the pending reform by the LDG, the recommendations in the report should only be approved on the basis that they would not be permanent, and that the review by the Committee after three months of implementation would be in accordance with the timeline specified by Officers.

In response to questions raised, the Director of Planning advised the Committee that the backlog of planning applications arose because it was not clear how the unprecedented circumstances would be managed immediately after the lockdown period.  However, the additional temporary decision-making delegation to officers outlined in the report would enable the Council to meet its duty in determining planning applications within the Government’s prescribed timescale.

The Director continued with her response, advising the Committee that the Planning department was committed to achieving recommendations on planning matters derived from the Local Democracy Review (LDR).  Thus, nuances in place would ensure that Members remain empowered to make panning decisions during the temporary change period.  As an indication, officers would continue to engage about rotas with chairs of planning committees in the event of a trigger of between 5 to 9 objections.  It was confirmed that referrals of objections to planning committees by ward councillors would remain.  Furthermore, the Planning department would continue to make referrals with significant impact and certain thresholds to the relevant committees as appropriate.  The Committee heard that that safeguards for Members’ ‘call-ins’ would also not be affected by the proposed plans.

Continuing on the issue of the LDR, the Director advised the Committee that complexity could arise in situations where local issues impact on more than one active community group existing in the same area.  Notwithstanding that objections on planning applications from amenity groups would be considered during the temporary period, irrespective of the decision-making route.

The Director further advised the Committee that decisions relating to the demolition of public houses were important.  However, the process would require broader discussions, backed by full public consultation.  Thus, it would be unrealistic to include such consideration as part of the temporary measures aimed at reducing the backlog of planning applications.

In her summing up, the Director reiterated that the determination of applications by planning committees during the current emergency situation would be resource-intensive, and could result in delays.  She echoed statements by the presenting Officer that Members should approve the recommendations in the report, confirming that they would not result in permanency.  It was confirmed that after three months of implementation, the temporary plans would be brought back in a report to the Committee, prior submitting for consideration at a meeting of the Mayor and Cabinet.

The meeting was addressed by a representative from the Blackheath Society.  The representative informed the Committee that the Society acknowledged the fact that the concerns by local amenity societies were outlined in the addendum to the report.  It was stated that the Society welcomed the reassurance about the three months’ implementation term of the temporary changes.  The Committee was asked to note that the Society would continue to monitor progress in the coming months, with an expectation that the processes would be transparent for local people to become aware of their rights and opportunities to participate.

In considering submissions made at the meeting, the Committee welcomed clarification by the Director that the proposed review of the temporary changes would provide an opportunity for Members to assess success in terms of the quality of the decisions that would be taken, and the transparent and fair processes that would be applied.  Thereafter, Councillor James-J Walsh moved the recommendations.  The recommendations were seconded by Councillor John Pashoud, and voted on.

The Committee

RESOLVED

Unanimously

That it be agreed to authorise temporary amendment of the list of matters that are reserved to Planning Committee’s A, B and C and to Strategic Planning Committee in the Council’s Scheme of Delegation set out on page 311 of the Council’s Constitution to enable the following matters be delegated to officers:

·                     Threshold of objections for applications being required to go to Planning Committee for decision to be raised from 3 to 5

·                     Any application with an amenity society objection to be subject to case review with Chair to determine whether it is referred to planning committee for a decision

·                     Any application with 5-9 objections to be subject to case review with Chair to determine whether it is referred to planning committee for a decision

·                     Agree that the above changes to working practices will be reviewed by the Strategic Planning Committee after a 3 month period following introduction.