Wrthi'n llwytho
Ymdriniodd y Pwyllgor Cynllunio ag un prif eitem: newidiadau i'r modd y rhennir penderfyniadau cynllunio rhwng y pwyllgor a swyddogion, ac i weithdrefnau'r pwyllgor. Cymeradwyodd y newidiadau gyda diwygiadau. Mae'r rhain yn cynnwys hawl newydd i'r cyhoedd siarad, terfyn amser o 48 awr ar gyfer sylwadau hwyr, ac argymhelliad i'r Cabinet ddod â'r drefn o gyfeirio deisebau â 50 neu fwy o lofnodion at y pwyllgor yn awtomatig i ben.
Apologies were received from Cllr Gunter. Cllr Wong was not present for the whole of item 4 and did not take part in the votes.
There were no declarations of interest.
The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee on 4th June were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair. Members queried whether it was a requirement to declare a personal interest in any applications that came to Committee which were in their ward. The Monitoring Officer clarified that this was no longer a requirement, though it had been some years ago, and asked that Members seek advice from legal officers if they were unsure about an interest.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED: That applications for variation of conditions on a grant of planning permission (s73), non-material amendments (NMA), discharge of conditions (DoC) and Reserved Matters (RM) - will be excluded from any requirement to be brought before Committee, and thus will always be matters delegated to Officers (including where applicable in consultation with the Chair) and will only be reported to Planning Committee in exceptional circumstances, with the agreement of the Chair of Planning. Except in such cases where the Committee has formally resolved that any subsequent/technical application be returned to the Committee for consideration. Note: Officers clarified that it was also within the Committee’s right to resolve that a matter be returned for their consideration. Any such resolution would override a delegation. Significant Applications The Scheme of Delegation does not currently explicitly identify or set any threshold above which applications must be reported to Committee. Instead, matters are reported where “the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment or the Head of Planning considers that the application should be determined by Planning Committee by virtue of the application raising significant policy and material considerations/ concerns and/or widespread local concerns”. On the thresholds at which applications triggered referral to the Committee, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To agree the following thresholds to capture those applications that are considered (most likely) to be ‘strategically important’: - Applications for Full or Outline Planning Permission (or a Hybrid application) for 250 or more new Units of Residential Accommodation, or on sites in excess of 10 Hectares; - Applications for Full or Outline Planning Permission (or a Hybrid application) which proposes in excess of 2500 square metres of new commercial / non residential floorspace or on sites in excess of 10 Hectares; - Applications for Full or Outline Planning Permission (or a Hybrid application) that are ‘major development’ (as defined by Regulations) and are accompanied by an Environmental Impact Statement. No substantive change is proposed to the discretion afforded to the Head of Planning for identifying applications that s/he feels should be determined by Planning Committee due to significant policy, material considerations or widespread local concern. This will therefore ensure that those applications which are not caught by the above thresholds but are still considered to have the greatest level of public interest or significant impacts can still be reported to Committee. When applying such discretion, the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chair of Planning, has regard to matters such as the scale/extent of development, whether the site is allocated in the Development Plan, and the nature and extent of substantive objections received on planning grounds. Member Requests to refer a Matter to Planning Committee The Scheme of Delegation currently allows an elected Member to request, within the statutory consultation period, that an application be referred to the Committee for valid planning reasons. However, the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, has discretion to decide that the application should be determined under officer delegation. In respect of Member requests to refer applications to the Committee, Members proposed that a formal record be kept of the Chair’s decisions, including the rationale for rejecting any requests to ensure transparency. Members also requested that this be regularly reported to Committee in the same way that decisions made by delegated powers and appeals were reported. This amendment was agreed by the Committee. RESOLVED: That requests for referral to Planning Committee to list such matters as a delegated decision subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning, rather than being reserved for Planning Committee decision. - New Procedure Note for Member requests to refer matter to committee: The Chair of Planning will determine whether a matter should be reported to Committee having regard to the nature of the request and representations received, and the essential business need for Planning Committee to focus on the most strategically important planning applications. - That a formal record be kept of the Chair’s decisions, including the rationale for rejecting any requests to ensure transparency. Members also requested that this be regularly reported to Committee in the same way that decisions made by delegated powers and appeals were reported. Objections from Statutory Consultees Currently, applications where the decision would conflict with an objection received from a statutory consultee and the objection has not been withdrawn or has been unable to be resolved by negotiation or by imposing a planning condition on any consent issued, except in cases where the Head of Planning, in consultation with Chair of Planning Committee (or in his or her absence, the Vice Chair) determines at his discretion that the application should be determined as a delegated decision. With regard to objections from statutory consultees, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That matters to be delegated to the Head of Planning, subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, who retains discretion to report to Committee where matters raised are considered to be of strategic importance or raise pertinent matters of public interest. *excluding Subsequent/Technical Applications as above. Petitions The Scheme of Delegation currently includes an automatic requirement to refer a matter to Planning Committee when a valid petition of 50 or more signatures is received (in accordance with the Council's Planning Committee Procedure Rules.) On changes to the petition scheme, several Members expressed concern at the proposal to delete the automatic referral process for applications with petitions of more than 50 signatures, as it was considered that it would be removing a democratic right by which the public could bring a planning application to Committee. Officers clarified that public speaking rights were proposed to be introduced separately, and that this change was intended to streamline the process and ensure that only petitions that needed to go to Committee did so. The Committee voted on a proposal from Cllrs Shimmin and Robson to retain the existing provisions relating to planning applications in the petition scheme and the automatic referral of applications with 50+ signatures. The Chair used their casting vote and this proposal was not carried. The Committee then voted on the recommendation in the report to remove the automatic referral of petitions with 50+ signatures to Committee. It was noted that the right to petition would continue to be available and that the petition would be referred to the Chair of Planning Committee. This proposal was carried. RESOLVED: To recommend to Cabinet the removal of the automatic referral of a planning application relating to a valid petition to the Planning Committee when a petition of 50 or more signatures is received. Matters instead to be delegated to the Head of Planning, subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, who retains discretion to report to Committee where matters raised are considered to be of strategic importance or raise pertinent matters of public interest. And to recommend to Cabinet that the Petition Scheme be amended to exclude Subsequent/Technical Applications. Number of Objections The Scheme of Delegation currently requires that any matter “where written objections on valid planning grounds have been submitted and remain unwithdrawn” be subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee. On the number of objections to an application required for it to be subject to consultation with the Chair, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To change the threshold to those applications where five or more objections are received, from 5 or more households (in addition to those on which a valid petition has been received), to target Chair oversight to those cases of most public interest. Below five objections to be a delegated matter. Chair of Planning request for matter to be heard at Committee The Scheme of Delegation currently includes no specific ability for the Chair of Planning to request that the matter be ‘referred” to the Planning Committee. On the addition of an explicit reference to the Chair’s ability to ‘call in’ request a planning application to come before the Planning Committee, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. Members also suggested using ‘they’ rather than ‘he or she’ throughout the documents, which officers agreed to do. RESOLVED: To include Planning Applications* where the Chair of Planning has determined at their discretion that that there are valid planning reasons why the application should be determined by Planning Committee. Note: This also ties in with changes to Petition rules and Member Requests for Referral to Committee. *excluding Subsequent/Technical Applications as above Council Applications Applications currently need to go to committee where Cardiff Council is the applicant and the scheme is not of a 'minor' nature in the opinion of the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment or Head of Planning. On applications that were not of a minor nature and where the council was the applicant, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That no change be made other than the exclusion of subsequent / technical applications (as above). Applications from Elected Members The Scheme of Delegation currently requires Planning applications submitted by or on behalf of any current Elected Member of the Council (except when a Member is acting in a professional capacity as an agent for a third party) to be reported to Committee. On applications submitted by or on behalf of Elected Members, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That no change be made other than the exclusion of subsequent / technical applications (as above). Applications from Officers The Scheme of Delegation currently requires Planning applications submitted by Directors and Assistant Directors or the Head of Planning to be reported to Committee. i.e. not just those in the planning service, but also excludes the Chief Executive. On applications submitted by or on behalf of officers, several Members suggested lowering the threshold for automatic Committee referral. Various options were discussed, as well as concerns regarding home address disclosure. The Committee voted on a proposal from Cllrs Driscoll and Michael that all applications from senior officers including Chief Officers involved in planning decisions or the Planning Department should come before the Committee. The proposal was carried. RESOLVED: That all applications from officers within the Planning Service who have responsibility for making planning decisions under planning delegations be determined by the Planning Committee, excluding Subsequent/Technical Applications as above. Delegated Matters Requiring Consultation with the Chair Consultation with the Chair of the Planning Committee is currently required in any case where written objections on valid planning grounds have been submitted and remain unwithdrawn. On delegated matters requiring consultation with the Chair, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That the following Matters be explicitly identified as delegated matters requiring consultation with the Chair: i. Where the Chair of Planning has specifically requested to be consulted before a decision is made; ii. Where the Head of Planning or a Planning Operational Manager has determined at his/her discretion that the decision should be subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning; iii. Where a valid petition (of more than 50 signatories) has been submitted in accordance with the Petition Scheme; iv. Where 5 or more written objections have been received (from 5 or more households); v. all applications from senior officers including Chief Officers involved in planning decisions or the Planning Department should come before the Committee; vi. Planning applications* where Cardiff Council is the applicant (and the matter is not required to be reported to Planning Committee); vii. Reports / LPA Submissions, including Local Impact Reports (LIR), in respect of Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIPs - Welsh Infrastructure Consents) and/or Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs); viii. Matters relating to Public Rights of Way or highways where objections are received; or refusal is recommended; or the Head of Highways, Infrastructure & Operations has determined at his/her discretion that the decision should be subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning; ix. Confirmation of a Tree Preservation Order where any objection has been received. That Subsequent/Technical Applications be excluded from the above. Delegated Matters All other matters not explicitly identified as Committee matters, or requiring Chair consultation, were matters delegated to officers. In the interest of certainty this included the following matters (except where otherwise required under the scheme of delegation): Refusal of Applications and Authorisation of Enforcement Action. Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. Speaking at Committee: Public Speaking and Time Limits for Elected Members There is currently no public speaking, with only ‘lead petitioners’ or agents/applicants (as a right of reply) able to address Committee. Any Ward Member speaking is currently able to address committee for up to 5 minutes. On public speaking at Planning Committee, Members welcomed the provision of public speaking rights outside of the Petition Scheme process, and discussed specifics relating to the time allowed and the number of Ward Members allowed to speak on a planning application. Members agreed that all speakers, whether speaking in support or objecting, as an applicant or agent, or as a Ward Member, would be limited to 4 minutes. Officers also clarified that multiple Ward Members speaking on the same application would do so at the Chair’s discretion. Members voted on this proposal, which was carried. RESOLVED: That in cases where an application is brought before Planning Committee under the Scheme of Delegation, a right to address the Committee (‘Public Speaking’) is introduced. That Objectors, Supporters and Applicants/Agents will each be able to address Committee (i.e. not just as a ‘right of reply’) That all speakers, whether speaking in support or objecting, as an applicant or agent, or as a Ward Member, would be limited to 4 minutes. That multiple Ward Members speaking on the same application would do so at the Chair’s discretion. Late Representations Currently accepted and reported to Members where received no later than 24 hours before start of meeting. On the deadline for the submission of Late Representations, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To change the deadline to require that late representations are received by no later than 48 hours prior to the scheduled start of the Planning Committee meeting (i.e. 10.30am on Tuesday for a standard Thursday meeting starting at 10.30am), in order to support a fair, transparent and well-managed decision-making process. Committee Site Visits (CSV) – Requests for Site Visits Officers, in consultation with the Chair of Planning, will often determine that an advance Members CSV is appropriate. There is currently no protocol that formally allows Members to request a CSV in advance. This means that the determination of applications is delayed to a subsequent Committee to allow such a visit to be undertaken. On requests for site visits, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To formalise a clear process that allows Members to request a CSV in advance of the meeting, in order to support efficient and well-timed decision-making, with Chair of Planning making decision in consultation with Head of Planning/OM. If not recommended by Chair, still allows Members to request CSV at Committee and for Committee to vote. Committee Site Visits (CSV) – Procedures on Site Wales Audit report identified a potential inequity (given Members have additional time to address members) and recommended that the SVP explicitly set out that Ward Members should not make representations to Planning Committee Members on matters relating to the planning merits of the case. On the Site Visit Protocol, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That the Site Visit Protocol be updated to reflect importance that CSVs are to establish facts on site and not to discuss merits of application. Members’ Planning Code of Good Practice and Planning Guide The Wales Audit Report states that “elements of the Members Planning Code of Good Practice are out of date - inaccuracies could create confusion about the Council’s arrangements supporting the Planning Committee. There is currently a degree of confusion in respect of the operations of the Planning Committee, Scheme of Delegation etc., with many (but not all) elements contained in the Constitution. This makes it difficult for Members, the public (and staff) to fully understand all processes. On the Members Planning Code of Good Practice and Planning Guide, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To prepare an updated Code of Conduct, aligning with current governance standards and reducing legal risk. That once the Constitution and associated changes have been approved through Planning Committee, Constitution, Cabinet (Petitions scheme) and Full Council, a ‘Planning Guide’ will be prepared which pulls together (reproduces or links to) all such elements into a single ‘easy to read’ guide, that can be placed online and available to all staff and members. Finally, the Committee agreed to delegate authority to officers to pick up their amendments made by the Committee and incorporate them into the proposal going forward to the Constitution Committee, as well as to delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Monitoring Officer to prepare and finalise the other procedure notes, protocols and guidance. RESOLVED: (i) To approve the proposed governance changes set out in the report and appendices, with amendments as agreed by the Committee as shown above; (ii) To delegate authority to the Director of Governance and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Head of Planning and the Chair of Planning Committee, to: a) finalise draft amendments to the Constitution (specifically, the Scheme of Delegations, the Planning Committee Procedure Rules and the Members’ Planning Code of Good Practice) to reflect the Planning Committee’s views and recommend the same to the Constitution Committee for consideration and to recommend any agreed changes to full Council for approval; b) finalise amendments to the Petition Scheme to reflect the Planning Committee’s views and recommend the same to Constitution Committee for consideration and subsequently to Cabinet for approval; (iii) To delegate authority to the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Director of Governance and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer and the Chair of Planning Committee, to prepare and finalise the other recommended procedure notes, protocols and guidance referenced within the report; (iv) To note that confirmation of the revised governance arrangements, once approved, will be circulated to all Members for information.
The Committee considered a report setting set out proposed amendments to governance arrangements for the discharge of planning functions. The proposed changes arose from a comprehensive internal review of planning governance arrangements and responded to recommendations made by Audit Wales in its review of the council’s Planning service. In particular, the report detailed proposed changes to: - the Scheme of Delegation for planning decisions; - the Planning Committee Procedure Rules; - public speaking and petition arrangements; - Member requests for referral to Planning Committee; - requests for site visits and the associated Planning Committee Site Visit Code of Practice; - late representations; - associated planning protocols and codes of practice. Steve Ball (OM Development Management, Strategic & Placemaking) gave a presentation on the proposed changes and responded to Member questions. Subsequent / Technical Applications The current Scheme of Delegation does not distinguish between applications for ‘planning permission’ (e.g. full or outline permission) and other applications for approval of details (or changes) following the grant of planning permission, including technical matters reserved by condition. Members suggested amending the proposed delegation to explicitly refer to cases where the Committee formally request that details under any condition should be returned to the Committee for determination. Officers clarified that it was within the Committee’s right to resolve that a matter be returned for their consideration. Any such resolution would override a delegation. This amendment was agreed by the Committee. RESOLVED: That applications for variation of conditions on a grant of planning permission (s73), non-material amendments (NMA), discharge of conditions (DoC) and Reserved Matters (RM) - will be excluded from any requirement to be brought before Committee, and thus will always be matters delegated to Officers (including where applicable in consultation with the Chair) and will only be reported to Planning Committee in exceptional circumstances, with the agreement of the Chair of Planning. Except in such cases where the Committee has formally resolved that any subsequent/technical application be returned to the Committee for consideration. Note: Officers clarified that it was also within the Committee’s right to resolve that a matter be returned for their consideration. Any such resolution would override a delegation. Significant Applications The Scheme of Delegation does not currently explicitly identify or set any threshold above which applications must be reported to Committee. Instead, matters are reported where “the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment or the Head of Planning considers that the application should be determined by Planning Committee by virtue of the application raising significant policy and material considerations/ concerns and/or widespread local concerns”. On the thresholds at which applications triggered referral to the Committee, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To agree the following thresholds to capture those applications that are considered (most likely) to be ‘strategically important’: - Applications for Full or Outline Planning Permission (or a Hybrid application) for 250 or more new Units of Residential Accommodation, or on sites in excess of 10 Hectares; - Applications for Full or Outline Planning Permission (or a Hybrid application) which proposes in excess of 2500 square metres of new commercial / non residential floorspace or on sites in excess of 10 Hectares; - Applications for Full or Outline Planning Permission (or a Hybrid application) that are ‘major development’ (as defined by Regulations) and are accompanied by an Environmental Impact Statement. No substantive change is proposed to the discretion afforded to the Head of Planning for identifying applications that s/he feels should be determined by Planning Committee due to significant policy, material considerations or widespread local concern. This will therefore ensure that those applications which are not caught by the above thresholds but are still considered to have the greatest level of public interest or significant impacts can still be reported to Committee. When applying such discretion, the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chair of Planning, has regard to matters such as the scale/extent of development, whether the site is allocated in the Development Plan, and the nature and extent of substantive objections received on planning grounds. Member Requests to refer a Matter to Planning Committee The Scheme of Delegation currently allows an elected Member to request, within the statutory consultation period, that an application be referred to the Committee for valid planning reasons. However, the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, has discretion to decide that the application should be determined under officer delegation. In respect of Member requests to refer applications to the Committee, Members proposed that a formal record be kept of the Chair’s decisions, including the rationale for rejecting any requests to ensure transparency. Members also requested that this be regularly reported to Committee in the same way that decisions made by delegated powers and appeals were reported. This amendment was agreed by the Committee. RESOLVED: That requests for referral to Planning Committee to list such matters as a delegated decision subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning, rather than being reserved for Planning Committee decision. - New Procedure Note for Member requests to refer matter to committee: The Chair of Planning will determine whether a matter should be reported to Committee having regard to the nature of the request and representations received, and the essential business need for Planning Committee to focus on the most strategically important planning applications. - That a formal record be kept of the Chair’s decisions, including the rationale for rejecting any requests to ensure transparency. Members also requested that this be regularly reported to Committee in the same way that decisions made by delegated powers and appeals were reported. Objections from Statutory Consultees Currently, applications where the decision would conflict with an objection received from a statutory consultee and the objection has not been withdrawn or has been unable to be resolved by negotiation or by imposing a planning condition on any consent issued, except in cases where the Head of Planning, in consultation with Chair of Planning Committee (or in his or her absence, the Vice Chair) determines at his discretion that the application should be determined as a delegated decision. With regard to objections from statutory consultees, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That matters to be delegated to the Head of Planning, subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, who retains discretion to report to Committee where matters raised are considered to be of strategic importance or raise pertinent matters of public interest. *excluding Subsequent/Technical Applications as above. Petitions The Scheme of Delegation currently includes an automatic requirement to refer a matter to Planning Committee when a valid petition of 50 or more signatures is received (in accordance with the Council's Planning Committee Procedure Rules.) On changes to the petition scheme, several Members expressed concern at the proposal to delete the automatic referral process for applications with petitions of more than 50 signatures, as it was considered that it would be removing a democratic right by which the public could bring a planning application to Committee. Officers clarified that public speaking rights were proposed to be introduced separately, and that this change was intended to streamline the process and ensure that only petitions that needed to go to Committee did so. The Committee voted on a proposal from Cllrs Shimmin and Robson to retain the existing provisions relating to planning applications in the petition scheme and the automatic referral of applications with 50+ signatures. The Chair used their casting vote and this proposal was not carried. The Committee then voted on the recommendation in the report to remove the automatic referral of petitions with 50+ signatures to Committee. It was noted that the right to petition would continue to be available and that the petition would be referred to the Chair of Planning Committee. This proposal was carried. RESOLVED: To recommend to Cabinet the removal of the automatic referral of a planning application relating to a valid petition to the Planning Committee when a petition of 50 or more signatures is received. Matters instead to be delegated to the Head of Planning, subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, who retains discretion to report to Committee where matters raised are considered to be of strategic importance or raise pertinent matters of public interest. And to recommend to Cabinet that the Petition Scheme be amended to exclude Subsequent/Technical Applications. Number of Objections The Scheme of Delegation currently requires that any matter “where written objections on valid planning grounds have been submitted and remain unwithdrawn” be subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee. On the number of objections to an application required for it to be subject to consultation with the Chair, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To change the threshold to those applications where five or more objections are received, from 5 or more households (in addition to those on which a valid petition has been received), to target Chair oversight to those cases of most public interest. Below five objections to be a delegated matter. Chair of Planning request for matter to be heard at Committee The Scheme of Delegation currently includes no specific ability for the Chair of Planning to request that the matter be ‘referred” to the Planning Committee. On the addition of an explicit reference to the Chair’s ability to ‘call in’ request a planning application to come before the Planning Committee, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. Members also suggested using ‘they’ rather than ‘he or she’ throughout the documents, which officers agreed to do. RESOLVED: To include Planning Applications* where the Chair of Planning has determined at their discretion that that there are valid planning reasons why the application should be determined by Planning Committee. Note: This also ties in with changes to Petition rules and Member Requests for Referral to Committee. *excluding Subsequent/Technical Applications as above Council Applications Applications currently need to go to committee where Cardiff Council is the applicant and the scheme is not of a 'minor' nature in the opinion of the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment or Head of Planning. On applications that were not of a minor nature and where the council was the applicant, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That no change be made other than the exclusion of subsequent / technical applications (as above). Applications from Elected Members The Scheme of Delegation currently requires Planning applications submitted by or on behalf of any current Elected Member of the Council (except when a Member is acting in a professional capacity as an agent for a third party) to be reported to Committee. On applications submitted by or on behalf of Elected Members, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That no change be made other than the exclusion of subsequent / technical applications (as above). Applications from Officers The Scheme of Delegation currently requires Planning applications submitted by Directors and Assistant Directors or the Head of Planning to be reported to Committee. i.e. not just those in the planning service, but also excludes the Chief Executive. On applications submitted by or on behalf of officers, several Members suggested lowering the threshold for automatic Committee referral. Various options were discussed, as well as concerns regarding home address disclosure. The Committee voted on a proposal from Cllrs Driscoll and Michael that all applications from senior officers including Chief Officers involved in planning decisions or the Planning Department should come before the Committee. The proposal was carried. RESOLVED: That all applications from officers within the Planning Service who have responsibility for making planning decisions under planning delegations be determined by the Planning Committee, excluding Subsequent/Technical Applications as above. Delegated Matters Requiring Consultation with the Chair Consultation with the Chair of the Planning Committee is currently required in any case where written objections on valid planning grounds have been submitted and remain unwithdrawn. On delegated matters requiring consultation with the Chair, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That the following Matters be explicitly identified as delegated matters requiring consultation with the Chair: i. Where the Chair of Planning has specifically requested to be consulted before a decision is made; ii. Where the Head of Planning or a Planning Operational Manager has determined at his/her discretion that the decision should be subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning; iii. Where a valid petition (of more than 50 signatories) has been submitted in accordance with the Petition Scheme; iv. Where 5 or more written objections have been received (from 5 or more households); v. all applications from senior officers including Chief Officers involved in planning decisions or the Planning Department should come before the Committee; vi. Planning applications* where Cardiff Council is the applicant (and the matter is not required to be reported to Planning Committee); vii. Reports / LPA Submissions, including Local Impact Reports (LIR), in respect of Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIPs - Welsh Infrastructure Consents) and/or Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs); viii. Matters relating to Public Rights of Way or highways where objections are received; or refusal is recommended; or the Head of Highways, Infrastructure & Operations has determined at his/her discretion that the decision should be subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning; ix. Confirmation of a Tree Preservation Order where any objection has been received. That Subsequent/Technical Applications be excluded from the above. Delegated Matters All other matters not explicitly identified as Committee matters, or requiring Chair consultation, were matters delegated to officers. In the interest of certainty this included the following matters (except where otherwise required under the scheme of delegation): Refusal of Applications and Authorisation of Enforcement Action. Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. Speaking at Committee: Public Speaking and Time Limits for Elected Members There is currently no public speaking, with only ‘lead petitioners’ or agents/applicants (as a right of reply) able to address Committee. Any Ward Member speaking is currently able to address committee for up to 5 minutes. On public speaking at Planning Committee, Members welcomed the provision of public speaking rights outside of the Petition Scheme process, and discussed specifics relating to the time allowed and the number of Ward Members allowed to speak on a planning application. Members agreed that all speakers, whether speaking in support or objecting, as an applicant or agent, or as a Ward Member, would be limited to 4 minutes. Officers also clarified that multiple Ward Members speaking on the same application would do so at the Chair’s discretion. Members voted on this proposal, which was carried. RESOLVED: That in cases where an application is brought before Planning Committee under the Scheme of Delegation, a right to address the Committee (‘Public Speaking’) is introduced. That Objectors, Supporters and Applicants/Agents will each be able to address Committee (i.e. not just as a ‘right of reply’) That all speakers, whether speaking in support or objecting, as an applicant or agent, or as a Ward Member, would be limited to 4 minutes. That multiple Ward Members speaking on the same application would do so at the Chair’s discretion. Late Representations Currently accepted and reported to Members where received no later than 24 hours before start of meeting. On the deadline for the submission of Late Representations, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To change the deadline to require that late representations are received by no later than 48 hours prior to the scheduled start of the Planning Committee meeting (i.e. 10.30am on Tuesday for a standard Thursday meeting starting at 10.30am), in order to support a fair, transparent and well-managed decision-making process. Committee Site Visits (CSV) – Requests for Site Visits Officers, in consultation with the Chair of Planning, will often determine that an advance Members CSV is appropriate. There is currently no protocol that formally allows Members to request a CSV in advance. This means that the determination of applications is delayed to a subsequent Committee to allow such a visit to be undertaken. On requests for site visits, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To formalise a clear process that allows Members to request a CSV in advance of the meeting, in order to support efficient and well-timed decision-making, with Chair of Planning making decision in consultation with Head of Planning/OM. If not recommended by Chair, still allows Members to request CSV at Committee and for Committee to vote. Committee Site Visits (CSV) – Procedures on Site Wales Audit report identified a potential inequity (given Members have additional time to address members) and recommended that the SVP explicitly set out that Ward Members should not make representations to Planning Committee Members on matters relating to the planning merits of the case. On the Site Visit Protocol, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: That the Site Visit Protocol be updated to reflect importance that CSVs are to establish facts on site and not to discuss merits of application. Members’ Planning Code of Good Practice and Planning Guide The Wales Audit Report states that “elements of the Members Planning Code of Good Practice are out of date - inaccuracies could create confusion about the Council’s arrangements supporting the Planning Committee. There is currently a degree of confusion in respect of the operations of the Planning Committee, Scheme of Delegation etc., with many (but not all) elements contained in the Constitution. This makes it difficult for Members, the public (and staff) to fully understand all processes. On the Members Planning Code of Good Practice and Planning Guide, Members did not object to the proposals set out in the report. RESOLVED: To prepare an updated Code of Conduct, aligning with current governance standards and reducing legal risk. That once the Constitution and associated changes have been approved through Planning Committee, Constitution, Cabinet (Petitions scheme) and Full Council, a ‘Planning Guide’ will be prepared which pulls together (reproduces or links to) all such elements into a single ‘easy to read’ guide, that can be placed online and available to all staff and members. Finally, the Committee agreed to delegate authority to officers to pick up their amendments made by the Committee and incorporate them into the proposal going forward to the Constitution Committee, as well as to delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Monitoring Officer to prepare and finalise the other procedure notes, protocols and guidance. RESOLVED: (i) To approve the proposed governance changes set out in the report and appendices, with amendments as agreed by the Committee as shown above; (ii) To delegate authority to the Director of Governance and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Head of Planning and the Chair of Planning Committee, to: a) finalise draft amendments to the Constitution (specifically, the Scheme of Delegations, the Planning Committee Procedure Rules and the Members’ Planning Code of Good Practice) to reflect the Planning Committee’s views and recommend the same to the Constitution Committee for consideration and to recommend any agreed changes to full Council for approval; b) finalise amendments to the Petition Scheme to reflect the Planning Committee’s views and recommend the same to Constitution Committee for consideration and subsequently to Cabinet for approval; (iii) To delegate authority to the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Director of Governance and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer and the Chair of Planning Committee, to prepare and finalise the other recommended procedure notes, protocols and guidance referenced within the report; (iv) To note that confirmation of the revised governance arrangements, once approved, will be circulated to all Members for information.
There were none.
Thursday 2nd July at 10:30am.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Dyw'r cofnodion ddim yn cofnodi unrhyw ddatganiadau o fuddiant.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.