Agenda item

A Member noted the application in respect of 65 Gresham Street, and, referencing an online article on the subject, sought confirmation as to why this had been determined under delegated authority rather than being brought to committee, given the suggestions that the scheme failed to accord with planning policy and the application was of public interest. Before a response was provided by the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director, the Interim Executive Director of Environment and a Member condemned abusive language used in the online article referenced.

The Chief Planning Officer and Development Director advised that the delegated officer’s report had not identified policy non-compliance issues with the scheme, and that the number of objections received was below the threshold at which applications are referred to Members. With regards to the level of public interest, the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director added that this had been a matter of judgement which he had exercised having considered the application. The Chief Planning Officer and Development Director further advised that he took full ownership for the decision to determine the application under delegated authority, and had not referred the matter to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman. In response to a question from another Member, the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director advised that the road closure included in the application was likely to be a managed and timed closure secured as part of the Section 278 agreement.

The Deputy Chairman, in the Chair, responded that delegated authority was an important part of the planning process and was required to keep the system moving, adding that where proposals had little or no objections and had been appropriately scrutinised by officers, they should be agreeable under delegation without management by the Sub-Committee.

A Member, referencing earlier discussion in respect of representations, asked that clarity on the approach taken in presenting applications, as well as a proposed approach for taking forward be provided by officers. The Chief Planning Officer and Development Director advised that officers could commit to including all representations in full if it were the will of Members. The Deputy Chairman, in the Chair, noting varying opinions on the appropriate approach, suggested that the issue be raised as a matter of policy at a meeting of the Grand Committee.

The Member further queried whether the scope of items that could be discussed under Questions and AOB needed clarification, as Members ought to be able to raise items causing concern with a degree of urgency, even if they related to consultations or the Local Plan rather than exclusively to planning applications. The Deputy Chairman, in the Chair, responded that he understood this view and asked that it be noted for following up.