The Strategic Director Place will submit a report (Document “Z”) which relates to proposals to merge the two Area Planning Panels into one single Planning Panel due to the gradual decrease in number of planning applications being dealt with at the existing Keighley and Shipley Area Planning Panel and the Bradford Area Planning Panel. The Regulatory and Appeals Committee would continue to consider strategically significant and major applications with the other applications being dealt with at a single Planning Panel which would meet more regularly to ensure applications are determined in a timely manner and performance targets continue to be met.

The report recommends implementation of the new panel arrangements for the next municipal year.

Recommended –

(1)       It is recommended that the Regulatory and Appeals Committee agree to recommend to full Council:

(2)       The amalgamation of the Keighley / Shipley and Bradford Area Panels into a single Planning Panel.

(3)       That the City Solicitor be requested to place this report (if            approved) before the Independent Remuneration Panel with a        view to a recommendation regarding the Chair’s and Deputy          Chair’s SRA .

(4)       That the City Solicitor be asked to draft amendments to the         Constitution to implement this decision, including references to the Planning Code of Conduct and the proposed amendments be      recommended to the Governance and Audit Committee to then be             forwarded to Council for approval.

(Chris Eaton -  01274 432483)

The Strategic Director Place submitted a report (Document “Z”) which related to proposals to merge the two Area Planning Panels into one single Planning Panel due to the gradual decrease in the number of planning applications being dealt with at the existing Keighley and Shipley Area Planning Panel and the Bradford Area Planning Panel. The Regulatory and Appeals Committee would continue to consider strategically significant and major applications with the other applications being dealt with at a single Planning Panel which would meet more regularly to ensure applications are determined in a timely manner and performance targets continue to be met.

The report recommended implementation of the new panel arrangements for the next municipal year.

The Assistant Director gave an overview of the proposed changes and the benefits that would accrue from amalgamating the two Area Planning Panels to one single district planning panel, which were detailed in the report.

Comments received from a Craven Ward Councillor were tabled at the meeting which cited a number of concerns around there being no public consultation on the proposed changes, venue and travel and the inconvenience this will cause, the danger of rushing through applications given the large number of applications at any one meeting and that transparency would be lost.

A resident of Silsden was present at the meeting and stated his opposition to the proposals, stating that applications were already decided under delegated powers and that by creating a single Panel would only create an extra burden for officers.  However, he cited the risk of errors, if local knowledge around planning applications was lost; logistical issues for residents having to travel into Bradford and he questioned the money that would be saved from such a proposal and expressing concerns that no public consultation had been undertaken on the revised proposals.

In response to some of the issues raised, the Assistant Director stressed that around 90 -95% of current planning applications were already dealt with under delegated authority and that officers were able to deal with this number of applications.  On the contrary, one Panel would reduce the burden on officers, create efficiencies and with the possibility of webcasting of meetings, be a better and more imaginative use of resources.  He added that there was no statutory need to consult with the public around what were operational requirements of the Council and the needs of the Service.

A Ilkley Ward Councillor was present at the meeting and stated her objections to the proposed merger, stating that this was more about cost cutting and that it would damage the reputation of the Council as well inconvenience communities, who would have to travel long distances in order for applications to be considered.  That officers could have explored other options such as delegating responsibility to the Area Committees, who had a more profound knowledge of their respective localities.

In response the Assistant Director stated that the proposal was not about cost cutting, but about efficiencies; will save on Member time; provide better consistency in terms of decision making and approach; improved training of Members and that he was open to the idea of having meetings in different parts of the district dependent on where the applications were situated.

Another Ilkley Ward Councillor was present at the meeting and stated that his objections were around the failure to consult with the public and with Councillors; that the composition of the Panel would result in the loss of local knowledge and would not necessarily make things better.  He urged that consultation take place widely on the proposals.

In response, the Assistant Director reiterated his earlier points adding that overall the number of applications being considered by the current Panels had been reduced and it was prudent to amalgamate the Panels.

A representative from the Ilkley Civic Society was also present at the meeting and expressed concerns that the public was a stakeholder, and although the proposals seemed to be about internal efficiencies, it would undermine public confidence in planning matters, in what was an already eroded system; that local knowledge would be lost and that consistency would not necessarily lead to better decision making.

In response the Assistant suggested that he was happy to meet with interested partied outside of the formal process on how we can improve on public engagement in the planning process.

A Bingley Rural Ward Councillor was also present and stated that people’s lives were affected by planning like no other issues and that these proposals flew in the face of localism, he urged reconsideration of the proposals in the context of more applications coming forward, not less; he argued that the travelling time for all concerned had not factored into the proposals and this was principally about cost savings.

During the discussion Members expressed some reservations on the proposals, in particular the loss of local knowledge and the potential for the number of planning applications to increase in the coming years as confidence in the economy picks up post Brexit.  Concerns were also expressed that no consultation had taken place with Ward Councillors, Town and Parish Councils and other interested Parties and Members urged that the proposals come back to the Committee, following this consultation, and it was therefore:

Resolved –

That Option 1 that is to do nothing and continue with the two Area Planning Panels be approved, however further consultation be undertaken on the proposals with all Councillors, Parish and Town Councillors and other interested parties, such as the Ilkley Civic Society.

ACTION: Assistant Director Transportation, Design and Planning