|
POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE |
9 February 2022 |
|
|
|
||
|
Church Road, Otham Review |
||
|
|
||
|
Final Decision-Maker |
Policy and Resources Committee |
|
|
Lead Head of Service |
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
|
Lead Officer and Report Author |
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
|
Classification |
Public
|
|
|
Wards affected |
All |
|
|
|
||
|
Executive Summary |
||
|
The report at Appendix A sets out the findings of the review into the Church Road, Otham case following a request from Policy and Resources Committee for an independent review to identify the lessons to be learnt. Democracy and General Purposes Committee considered the report on 23 November 2021. Their recommendations are included within this report.
|
||
|
Purpose of Report
Decision
|
||
|
|
||
|
This report makes the following recommendations to this Committee: Note the findings and approve the following actions: |
||
|
a) That external planning training on the officer role and role of statutory objectors is provided to Councillors appointed to Planning Committee and the Planning Referral body as part of the annual Councillor development programme. b) The Member development programme include training on the Local Plan and its significance. c) Councillors be encouraged to attend meetings of the SPI Committee on the Local Plan as well as all briefings on the plan and the planning policy team include all groups in briefings. d) More information be provided to the public on the planning process and how objections are considered starting with additional information on the Council’s website. e) An annual training event be held as part of the Councillor training programme run by an external agency such as PAS on the planning process, objections and how they are weighted and considered to aid councillors in ward work. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Timetable |
||
|
Meeting |
Date |
|
|
Policy and Resources Committee |
3 February 2021 |
|
|
Democracy and General Purposes Committee |
10 March 2021 |
|
|
Democracy and General Purposes Committee |
23 November 2021 |
|
|
Policy and Resources Committee |
9 February 2022 |
|
|
Church Road, Otham Review |
|
|
1. CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS
|
Issue |
Implications |
Sign-off |
|
Impact on Corporate Priorities |
The four Strategic Plan objectives are:
· Embracing Growth and Enabling Infrastructure · Safe, Clean and Green · Homes and Communities · A Thriving Place The report recommendation supports the achievement of the objectives by seeking to review and improve Council decision making.
|
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
Cross Cutting Objectives |
The four cross-cutting objectives are:
· Heritage is Respected · Health Inequalities are Addressed and Reduced · Deprivation and Social Mobility is Improved · Biodiversity and Environmental Sustainability is respected
The report recommendation supports the achievement of the cross cutting objectives by seeking to review and improve Council decision making.
|
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
Risk Management |
Set out in the risk section at paragraph 5.1 of the report.
|
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
Financial |
The proposals set out in the recommendation need no new funding for implementation, the additional training proposed can be met within the existing member training funding.
|
Section 151 Officer & Finance Team |
|
Staffing |
We will deliver the recommendations with our current staffing. |
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
Legal |
The Council have power to do anything which is calculated to facilitate or is conducive or incidental to the discharge of any of their functions under s111 of the Local Government Act 1972. A review seeking to improve Council decision making would be within this remit.
|
Interim Deputy Head of Legal Partnership. |
|
Privacy and Data Protection |
No impact |
|
|
Equalities |
The recommendations do not propose a change in service therefore will not require an equalities impact assessment.
|
Equalities and Communities Officer |
|
Public Health |
We recognise that the recommendations will not negatively impact on population health or that of individuals.
|
Public Health Officer |
|
Crime and Disorder |
No impact. |
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
Procurement |
No impact. |
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
|
Biodiversity and Climate Change |
No impact. |
Angela Woodhouse, Head of Policy, Communications and Governance |
2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
2.1 The Policy and Resources Committee on the 3rd of February 2021 met to consider challenging the outcome of an appeal against refusal of planning consent and an associated non-determination appeal concerning a site in Church Road Otham where the Planning Inspector decided that the proposed development should be approved.
2.2 As a result it was agreed that:
“Lessons be learned from the experience of the Church Road application; and that the terms of reference and lines of enquiry be suggested and presented to the Democracy and General Purposes Committee for consideration.”
2.3 The Democracy and General Purposes Committee agreed the key lines of enquiry and scope of the review at its meeting on 10 March 2021 following a request from this Committee. An external advisor was appointed to assist the Head of Policy, Communications and Governance with the review. The external advisor, a former Head of Planning, has assisted with the report production and recommendations, having reviewed the evidence and guided the approach taken.
2.4 As part of the review a survey was carried out of all current members who had been involved in the process, the results of which are attached at Appendix B for information. A number of officers were interviewed including officers from Planning and Mid Kent Legal Services. Telephone interviews were also conducted with four councillors including the former Chairs of Policy and Resources and Planning Committees.
2.5 The report attached at Appendix A was presented to the Democracy and General Purposes Committee on 23 November 2021. The minute of the discussion is attached at Appendix C. The Democracy and General Purposes Committee’s conclusion on the report was that only recommendation d) to improve information available to the public could be approved. As is evident from the debate Councillors expressed a variety of concerns about the issue and did not accept all of the report’s findings.
3. AVAILABLE OPTIONS
3.1 The report at Appendix A was commissioned as an independent report and is presented for consideration of the findings and recommendations. The Committee has several options available:
1. Accept all or any of the Recommendations
2. Reject all the Recommendations
3. Accept recommendation d) as per the direction given by Democracy and General Purposes Committee
4. Request additional action
4. PREFERRED OPTION
4.1 As expressed at the Democracy and General Purposes Committee meeting in November many Councillors are very experienced and have a great deal of knowledge of planning. The recommendations in the report seek to bolster this knowledge and training for all Councillors. This extends to include matters of individual roles and responsibilities, as well as the statutory and regulatory frameworks within which the system operates.
4.2 In addition, Councillor and public engagement at all stages of the planning process could potentially be strengthened, and more information made available on the Council website, particularly in matters which are high-profile or locally contentious.
4.3 The recommendations proposed should assist in providing a greater overall understanding of the planning system and in how applications should be considered.
4.4 The report at Appendix A includes a set of recommendations. The Committee is asked to consider and approve all the recommendations as per Option 1 above on the basis that they all have merit and would enhance the planning process.
5. RISK
5.1 The
purpose of the review was to identify lessons learnt and improvements which
should mitigate risk in respect of future planning decisions.
6. CONSULTATION RESULTS AND PREVIOUS COMMITTEE FEEDBACK
6.1 Democracy and General Purposes Committee were consulted on the scope of the review following other Councillors’ input in March of this year. The minute concerning their consideration of the final report is attached at Appendix C.
6.2 The review includes feedback from various stakeholders as agreed with Councillors.
7. NEXT STEPS: COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION
7.1 Any actions approved will be taken forward by officers.
8. REPORT APPENDICES
The following documents are to be published with this report and form part of the report:
· Appendix A: Review into Church Road Otham
· Appendix B: Councillor Survey Results
· Appendix C: Minute of Democracy and General Purposes Committee
9. BACKGROUND PAPERS
Planning Committee 24 October 2019:
· 19/501600/OUT Land West Of Church Road, Otham, Kent, ME15 8SB
Planning Committee on 28 May 2020:
· 19/501600/OUT - Land West Of Church Road, Otham, Kent, ME15 8SB
· 19/506182/FULL - Land West Of Church Road, Otham, Kent, ME15 8SB
Planning Committee 25 June 2020:
· 19/501600/OUT & 19/506182/FULL - Land West Of Church Road, Otham, Kent
Planning Referral Body 13 July 2020:
· Planning Applications 19/501600/OUT & 19/506182/FULL - Land West of Church Road, Otham, Kent, ME15 8SB
Policy and Resources Committee 3 February 2021:
· Review of Planning Inspectorate Decisions – Church Road, Otham