Agenda item

That the Committee formally withdraws delegated powers of the Officer’s decision to cease providing hard copies of planning applications for Parish Councils and requests a further detailed options report so that the Committee can consider a decision at a later date.

*Before the decision was published the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chief Executive, discussed with the Chairman of the Committee that the withdrawal of delegated power from the Head of Planning and Development was not within the Committee’s power. Therefore the delegated power remains with the Head of Planning and Development.

The Head of Planning and Development presented a report on E-Planning – Parish copies of applications.

The Committee was asked to note the next steps in the introduction of E-Planning which specifically relate to how information is provided to Parish Councils.

It was noted that the Planning Support Shared Service was in the process of delivering its electronic planning project, which was part of the original vision for the shared service agreed by the council and was driving changes to achieve an efficient and modern planning service. 

The Committee was informed that:

·  the most efficient way for applicants to submit, and  MKPS to receive applications was via the planning portal (i.e. electronically) as they were instantly available for all interested parties

·  the Council received 70-75% of applications through the planning portal. 

·  to maximise efficiency it was crucial that printing requirements in MKPS were reduced as they cost an estimated £60-75k a year for MKPS which was made up of printing of documents during validation, printing of letters, printing of applications for planning officers and printing of applications for parish councils. 

·  that the production of hardcopies of planning applications for parish councils was a significant proportion of the printing requirements of MKPS

·  a number of options were proposed when the pilot project for paperless applications was started with parish councils in 2014. This was put on hold due to performance issues at that time. Those options had been revisited to test they are still viable

·  the main barrier identified by parishes was poor quality broadband in some areas

During the discussion the following points were made:-

·  That a consultation was carried out in 2014 but the results were not communicated to Parish Councils.

·  That the results of the trials with some Parish Councils were also not communicated to Parish Councils.

·  That it was impossible to look at planning application material on a laptop.

·  Concern was expressed about the timeline of implementation.  It was believed that the 1^st April was unworkable.

·  That this change had not been budgeted for amongst the Parish Councils and had come just after the precepts had been communicated.

In response to the comments raised, the Mid Kent Planning Support Manager advised that:-

·  There was nothing in the Parish Charter about printing of planning applications.

·  The decision to make changes was an operational one and had been delegated to the Head of Planning and Development in the Constitution.

·  It was agreed when the Planning Support Service became a Shared Service that a review would take place to look at modernising the planning system with a view to being paperless which would produce savings.

·  The trials carried out were for a number of different elements of the process.

·  That in some cases a compromise could be worked out with Parishes that had particular difficulties.

RESOLVED:  That the Committee formally withdraws delegated powers of the Officer’s decision to cease hard copies of planning applications for Parish Councils and requests a further detailed options report so that the Committee can consider a decision at a later date.

Voting:  For:  9  Against:  0  Abstentions:  0

However, before the decision was published the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chief Executive, discussed with the Chairman of the Committee that the withdrawal of delegated power from the Head of Planning and Development was not within the Committee’s power.  Therefore, the delegated power remains with the Head of Planning and Development.