Agenda item

The Commission considered a report of the Acting Director of Planning and Transportation concerning the main proposals contained in the Government's recent Green Paper on "Planning : Delivering a Fundamental Change" and the proposed response to it from the Cabinet.  A copy of the report, marked 'B' is filed with this minutes.  Consideration was also given to the comments made by the Planning and Environment Scrutiny Committee on the report at its meeting on 21 February 2002 and to a news release from the County Council's Network.  Copies of these two documents were circulated before the meeting and are also filed with these minutes.

 

The Commission in the course of the debate made comments as follows:

 

i)          There were difficulties with the present system of strategic planning and planning control which should be addressed.  In particular :-

 

·        There was a need for speedier resolution of major and complex planning applications and for the development of a robust decision-making process to deal with such cases.  It was noted that responsibility for the delay frequently lay with Government departments.  However, any process of reform should ensure that the public were given appropriate rights to be consulted, ample opportunity to raise objections and were treated fairly. 

 

·        The current system of forward planning involving structure plans and local plans could prove cumbersome in practice.  The overlapping nature of the plans could lead to duplication and it was important to ensure that there was no conflict between structure plans and local plans. 

 

·        The current system of forward planning and the responsibilities of county councils and district councils was not readily comprehensible to the public.  Any change in the current approach should be designed to ensure a greater degree of transparency and that the system was readily understood.

 

ii)         The current plan-led system was essential as a means of controlling unlimited development and creating appropriate expectations of likely action in respect of planning control.  There was a need for strategic and co-ordinating sub-regional planning.  Whilst endorsing the comments at paragraph 26 of the report to Cabinet, the view was expressed that the key topic areas identified in the third bullet point of that paragraph could not be effectively dealt with at regional or district level (housing distribution, employment land allocations, retail floor space requirements, mineral and waste, green wedges).  Co-ordination was required to ensure consistency of approach at district level.  The proposed partial coverage of planning issues at sub-regional level was insufficient to achieve these aims.

 

iii)        With regard to the proposals to increase responsibilities at regional planning level through the transfer of responsibilities from County Councils, the Commission was of the view that this would create serious problems, in particular:-

 

·        The size of the region would have the effect that any regional planning body would be remote from district councils and local issues such as green wedges,  town centres and school travel issues.

 

·        There would be problems of accountability to the general public and transparency; it would be difficult to ensure that members of the public were aware of the forward planning process.

 

·        It would be more difficult for the public to be involved in processes of consultation and objection in relation to the formulation of plans, than was currently the case.

 

·        It was likely that there would be problems of democratic deficit and so lack of democratic accountability at regional level.

 

·        The importance of probity in planning and an appropriate system for declarations of interest, as is well established in local government, could not readily be applied to regional decision-making processes involving non-elected representatives of interest groups, with a pre-conceived agenda in relation to planning issues.

 

·        There was no existing expertise at regional level sufficient to undertake the increased responsibilities.

 

iv)        County Councils, had a good track record of producing Structure Plans and adopting a co-ordinating role on issues where there might be inconsistency of approach by districts.  Evidence of that success was to be found in the achievements of the County Council in reaching agreement on the allocation of housing development across the District Councils within Leicestershire.

 

v)         The proposal that counties should retain the preparation of minerals and waste local plan was inconsistent was the general approach, lacked clarity and would be likely to lead to further problems of confusion and lack of transparency in the planning system for the general public.

 

vi)        An alternative approach to the Government’s proposal was to retain the existing system of structure plans whilst accepting that in some areas it would be appropriate for a "lighter touch" to be adopted and that efforts should be made to avoid duplication with local plans (or local development frameworks).

 

RESOLVED:-

 

a)         That the comments of the Planning and Environment Scrutiny Committee, be noted.

 

b)         That the response set out in the report of the Acting Director of Planning and Transportation to the Cabinet be endorsed, and that the Cabinet be requested to ensure that the views of Scrutiny Committee as set out above are incorporated within the final response.

 

c)         That the alternative proposal set out at paragraph 29 of the report be endorsed subject to:-

 

(i)                 The first bullet point being amended to emphasise the need for the regional planning role to be exercised by directly elected members of an appropriate regional body;

 

(ii)        The preparation of local development frameworks or, as suggested in the response of the County Council's Network, area action plans should involve county councils; however, the primary responsibility should remain with district councils.

 

d)         That the Cabinet be requested to make arrangements with a view to ensuring that the views of the County Council are made clear to local MPs and that the strength of feeling of members and their unanimity of view be emphasised.