Agenda Item No

 

The Vale of Glamorgan Council

 

Cabinet Meeting: 15th July, 2009

 

Report of the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration

 

Planning Committee Matters: Third Party Involvement at Planning Committee

 

Purpose of the Report

1.             To advise the Cabinet in respect of a request received from Councillor Nic Hodges on behalf of Plaid Cymru, County and Community Councillors in the Vale of Glamorgan, to allow third party participation in the Planning Committee process.

Recommendation

1.             That Cabinet consider this report.

Reason for the Recommendation

1.             In order to seek views on the matter of third party participation at Planning Committee.

Background

2.             Late last year the Chairman of Planning Committee received a request from Councillor Nic Hodges in his capacity as a member of the Barry Town Council, to consider allowing Community Councils to represent themselves at the Planning Committee.  The request included research that had been undertaken by Councillor Hodges into the situation in other Councils in Wales. (Appendix A)

Relevant Issues and Options

3.             The research undertaken by Councillor Hodges involved sending requests to the 21 Councils in Wales (other than the Vale of Glamorgan) and responses were received from 16 Councils.  (It should be noted that the 3 National Park Authority that are Local Planning Authorities in their own right were not consulted.

4.             The results indicate that 14 Councils allow some form of third party representation at the planning committee (two of these being Community Council only) 2 further respondents allow no third party involvement and 5 councils failed to respond, although it would appear that none of these Councils allow third party involvement.

5.             The research concludes that the Vale of Glamorgan Council should consider and allow some form of third party involvement at planning committee in order that the rights of the public in the Vale are protected.

6.             It is clear that if Community Councils are allowed the right to address the Committee, other interest groups and if individuals should also be afforded this right.  In the interests of equity, this right must also be extended to a right of reply from the planning applicant or their agent.  Clearly it is only if the opportunity to address Committee was afforded to all would such a process would be seen as inclusive and would involve the general public in the decision making of the planning committee.

7.             However on closer assessment there are a number of difficulties and problems which would be encountered in promoting such an approach.

Difficulties and problems in allowing public speaking

8.             It is clear that the current Committee process could be significantly lengthened by affording the various parties the opportunity to speak.  Accordingly Committee which currently starts a 6 pm would be likely to take significantly longer to complete and it may be necessary to reschedule the Committee during the working day in order to accommodate the additional time required.

9.             It is considered that it would be necessary to employ some form of stewarding of the public and associated controls over the time each party will be allowed to speak.  This will necessitate at least an additional Committee Clerk to manage the process and at least one security guard/porter and will substantially increase costs associated with running the committee.

10.        The current Committee Room 2 is not conducive to the public speaking from the public gallery and the room will either have to be re-fitted or Planning Committee would have to move to the main Council chamber.

11.        Members would have a very short period of time to consider and respond to the points raised verbally by those making representations and the applicants/agents at the meeting itself and this could consequently lead to more deferments to assess the issues raised at the meeting.

12.        When allowing third parties to speak, the Council will have no control over the content of what is presented and it must be a concern that if unsubstantiated or untruthful statements are made by either objectors or applicants, the whole process could be open to judicial review in the Courts.  Furthermore it is not clear that the process will be seen as fair if an applicant or agent is unable to get to a meeting when an objector is able to express their views.  This may not be seen as in compliance with natural justice and may once again lead to deferments and the whole process being unnecessarily lengthened.

13.        There is a fear that in emotive or difficult cases the planning merits of the matter being considered will be ignored. 

14.        There is also a concern that it could lead to a system where those with the financial means can pay for the best advocacy in attempt to impact on the discussion and this in turn may actually disadvantage complainants or even applicants.  Furthermore it has to be noted that the planning process is a, policy led system where all views are considered and assessed having regard to the relevant material considerations.  It is important to remember that the planning process is not a referendum where those who make the most out of representation or shout the loudest are successful.

15.        Contact has been made at officer level with the three neighbouring Local Planning Authorities of Cardiff, Rhondda Cynon Taff and Bridgend, who all operate slightly different versions of third party involvement at Committee. Officers from RCT expressed most concerns as they currently have no limits on the number of persons able to speak at committee either for or against an application.  They are currently looking at tightening their rules because there are concerns at the quality of decisions being made by the planning committee.  Cardiff and Bridgend are more specific about who can speak at their meetings, but did express similar concerns to those rehearsed above.  It is worth noting that in the case of both Councils, committee meetings are held during the working day due to the additional time required to allow third party involvement.

16.        Finally, it should be noted that the Council already operate a very generous and efficient late representation procedure whereby all those with an interest in proposals can make their views known.

Benefits of the current system

17.        In this regard the current system allows very generous late representations up until 12 pm on the day before committee.  This allows officers and member 24 hours to consider the comments submitted and ensure that everyone is fully advised before attending the planning committee.  Most late items are presented in a report format and it is usual for all comments raised to be fully assess and if necessary addressed at the meeting itself.

18.        Community and Town Councils already have generous consultation allowances and any comments they make will be accepted up until 12 pm on the day before Committee, in common with other parties.

19.        Community and Town Councils are also currently invited on to the Conservation Advisory Group when applications are presented from the areas they represent and they are able to make further comments through this process.  In addition a recent initiative has been to commence a Town and Community Council Forum to discuss and consider matters of mutual interest.  This met in the spring and the next meeting will be held in November.

Resource Implications (Financial and Employment)

20.        To allow public speaking at planning committee will require considerable capitol expenditure in terms of upgrading faculties to allow this to take place effectively.

21.        It is likely that to properly manage and control public speaking additional staff will be required to attend the Committee Meetings and that these meetings will take considerably longer, thereby requiring a consideration of holding meetings during the day.

Legal Implications (to Include Human Rights Implications)

22.        None arising directly out of this report.

Crime and Disorder Implications

23.        None arising out of this report.

Equal Opportunities Implications (to include Welsh Language issues)

24.        None arising directly out of this report.

Corporate/Service Objectives

25.        None arising out of this report.

Policy Framework and Budget

26.        This report is a matter for Executive decision by Cabinet.

Consultation (including Ward Member Consultation)

27.        The Head of Legal Services and the Chairman of Planning Committee.

Relevant Scrutiny Committee

28.        Economy and Environment.

Background Papers

None.

Contact Officer

Marcus Goldsworthy - Operational Manager Development Control - Tel: 01446 704661.

Officers Consulted

Head of Legal Services - Committee Report

Financial Services

Responsible Officer:

Rob Quick - Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration.