Planning permission meeting (3 minutes to speak) - what to expect?

Karen_taris

Planning permission meeting (3 minutes to speak) - what to expect?


A planning application has been made by neighbours and letters sent out to see if any one objects.

it is for a house in a garden which will be near ours.

Objections would be it would overshadow and block light coming into our property and also traffic concerns.

Along with the letters of objection a few neighbours can submit

there is also a planning committee meeting where you can speak.

This is for objectors, the applicant and planning offers to attend.


The objectors speak their objections in 3 minutes and get possible questions. There is then a show of hands

and then they then approve or deny the application.

Here are our concerns, can you please answer as many as you can. Thanks xx

a) Has anyone had experience of this type of planning committee meeting ?

(perhaps you have been in one of these meetings/ or you are a planning officer / or work for the council)

b) What kind of thing is to be expected in these meetings ?

c) We are objecting and a family member  who is  best to speak on our  behalf  does not live on our property but lives in a very near town. Can this member of the family speak on 'our' behalf?

He would represent us

d) or is it only the members living in the household that attends the meeting  ?

e) Is the decision to accept or deny the application based on the most amount of hands shown ?

f) If you had this situation, were there enough objectors that it didn't even get to the meeting stage?
and no meeting was required? because it was rejected on the basis of objection letters?

g) If you or somebody you know attended this meeting, what was it like? was it intense or just formal an polite?

h) Can we take photographs and bring them to the meeting to show as proof/evidence?   (I have edited / added this question above)

can you please answer as many of the concerns you can,

and please answer in a) b) c) d) e)  f) g) f) format so can be followed clearly.

thank you xx

MSE_James

a)  Yes. Does you council webcast its meetings? If so, you can watch a few past meetings to get an idea of the format.

b) They will vary considerably from council to council - different authorities have a different ethos. 

c) Check your council's rules - these can vary. usually someone can speak on your behalf but I would say best if someone personally affected does so, as can be more powerful.

d) The meeting is open to the public

e) It will be based on the votes of the elected members of the committee, yes. 

f) The council will have its own rules about what types of application can be determined by officers under delegated authority vs which ones need a committee hearing. It may also depend on whether the professional planning officers are recommending approval or refusal. 

g) The mood can vary considerably - a good chair will create a brisk and purposeful atmosphere that puts people at their ease whilst keeping things moving at a good pace. But not every committee has a good chair... 

Karen_taris

thanks xx.

Can we take photographs and bring them to the meeting to show as proof/evidence?   (I have edited / added this question above)

MSE_James

Again, that will depend on your council's policies and procedures. Some councils have a cut-off date for submission of any handouts or visual aids.  Some will insist that officers have a chance to scrutinise any images/docs/drawings before they are passed to members, so they can give the councillors their professional advice.  Others will allow photos etc to be passed round the room on the day.

Lorian

Photos better submitted in advance with narrative and ask them to be put in the office reports to the members even if its after the time for objections to be recorded.

Keep in mind that 3 minutes could be split between all those objecting and it might not be just you.  You can have someone else representing you, they just need to say they are "representing the xxx family" or "representing no 2 cherry tree lane". 

You can ONLY speak in that three minutes. Heckling, booing, or even commenting at length outside that will upset the chair and might get you thrown out. Keep the objection to MATERIAL PLANNING grounds, how you feel about it has no sway in these meetings. 

MSE_James

At the council with which I am most familiar, if a member of the public runs out of time in their three minutes but clearly has more to say, the first question will usually be "are there any other points you wanted to bring to our attention"?  You can't take this for granted though, and best to have a to-the-point presentation.

Towards the end of your speaking slot you can also say something like "I also have concerns about x, y and z and would welcome the opportunity to answer questions from the committee on these topics".  

Section62

MSE_James said:

f) The council will have its own rules about what types of application can be determined by officers under delegated authority vs which ones need a committee hearing. It may also depend on whether the professional planning officers are recommending approval or refusal.

^This.

If an application goes to committee the officer's report will make a recommendation to members to either grant or refuse consent.  On the whole the members will go along with the recommendation of the officer - in particular members will be aware that if they refuse consent (especially against the officer's recommendation) the council can be on the hook for costs if the applicant makes a sucessful appeal.

Generally they will only vote to refuse against the officer's recommendation if there is something significantly 'political' about the decision - i.e. that the risk of costs against the council is worth it to make a point of principle. Members are likely to be warned by the council's legal/monitoring officer - before and during the meeting - that voting to refuse may result in costs being awarded against the council.

So usually there needs to be something fairly exceptional for members to vote against an officer's 'approve' recommendation.

MSE_James said:

g) The mood can vary considerably - a good chair will create a brisk and purposeful atmosphere that puts people at their ease whilst keeping things moving at a good pace. But not every committee has a good chair... 

Completely agree.  Having sat through hundreds of hours of planning committee meetings (as a local government officer) the quality of the meeting depends almost entirely on the quality of the chair.  The meetings can vary from coma-inducing through to edge-of-seat stuff.

Unfortunately, in most cases the decision has really been made before the meeting starts.  Much of the 'debate' is political showboating, and whilst the public get to have a say, it doesn't count for a great deal.  My advice to someone planning to speak at a planning meeting is not to get your hopes up too much (sorry) and be concise and make sure you stick to issues that might make a difference.

Karen_taris

Section62 said:

MSE_James said:

f) The council will have its own rules about what types of application can be determined by officers under delegated authority vs which ones need a committee hearing. It may also depend on whether the professional planning officers are recommending approval or refusal.

^This.

If an application goes to committee the officer's report will make a recommendation to members to either grant or refuse consent.  On the whole the members will go along with the recommendation of the officer - in particular members will be aware that if they refuse consent (especially against the officer's recommendation) the council can be on the hook for costs if the applicant makes a sucessful appeal.

Generally they will only vote to refuse against the officer's recommendation if there is something significantly 'political' about the decision - i.e. that the risk of costs against the council is worth it to make a point of principle. Members are likely to be warned by the council's legal/monitoring officer - before and during the meeting - that voting to refuse may result in costs being awarded against the council.

So usually there needs to be something fairly exceptional for members to vote against an officer's 'approve' recommendation.

MSE_James said:

g) The mood can vary considerably - a good chair will create a brisk and purposeful atmosphere that puts people at their ease whilst keeping things moving at a good pace. But not every committee has a good chair... 

Completely agree.  Having sat through hundreds of hours of planning committee meetings (as a local government officer) the quality of the meeting depends almost entirely on the quality of the chair.  The meetings can vary from coma-inducing through to edge-of-seat stuff.

Unfortunately, in most cases the decision has really been made before the meeting starts.  Much of the 'debate' is political showboating, and whilst the public get to have a say, it doesn't count for a great deal.  My advice to someone planning to speak at a planning meeting is not to get your hopes up too much (sorry) and be concise and make sure you stick to issues that might make a difference.

Thank you all for the info.

are you both (Section62 &  MSE_James) saying this

"professional planning officers are recommending approval or refusal."

are you saying this:

 The planning officer will come out to the site to investigate, and check the list of neighbours objections, to see visually if
 "light will be blocked, in the objectors property
"traffic and noise concerns 'after' the building is built.
other things they have objected

and if they are satisfied they are genuine objections which they favor towards they will refuse the application.

and they will make a report on these findings and refuse the application

This refusal decision will be made before the 3 minute meeting,

1) Is that all correct?

2) do the planning officers make the decision to approve or refuse the application the same day they visit the site?

if not how many days to they take to decide?

3) if they are in favour towards the objectors and refuse the application, 

How many days is the refusal report produced?

does this report state their findings have made them decide the application to be refused?

4) Do we the public objectors get to see this refusal decision before the 3 minute meeting?   on the website?

5) ie on the council planning website page, where the submission details are will the status change from 'pending consideration' to 'refused' ?

6) Will they definitely  come out physically to view the site, or they can not and just wait until the meeting ?

7) If you say it is political, does that mean the vote of hands thing is not really considered?

again answers in 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) format please xxx

Sarahspangles

1) It is not correct that the officer makes the decision - they make a recommendation which is backed up by a written report which discusses relevant considerations in planning terms. Sometimes if the recommendation towards a specific decision is not clear cut they will use wording like 'finely balanced' or 'on balance' in making their recommendation. 

Section62

Karen_taris said:

4) Do we the public objectors get to see this refusal decision before the 3 minute meeting?   on the website?

As Sarahspangles says, it isn't a decison, it is a recommendation, and it will be published in a report of the council's meetings website 'x' days before the meeting takes place. 'x' depends on local policy - contact the council to find out when the report will first be available.

5) ie on the council planning website page, where the submission details are will the status change from 'pending consideration' to 'refused' ?

Usually the details for the application will say something like 'Officer' or 'Committee' or 'Delegated' - and if not officer/delegated they may say which committee will consider the application and when.

6) Will they definitely  come out physically to view the site, or they can not and just wait until the meeting ?

Unlikely these days that anyone will come to the site - streetview has reduced the need for that. You should be able to find out who the case officer is, and ask them.

7) If you say it is political, does that mean the vote of hands thing is not really considered?

No, I meant the members will normally only vote to refuse against the officer recommendation if there is a point to be made (small 'p' political) - for example refusing an application for a waste-handling site next to a primary school because people are making a lot of fuss about the impact on the children.

During the debate members may say what a terrible thing it is and a total outrage... but then finish with '...but I reluctantly have to vote to approve/abstain'. (aka political showboating).

My replies in bold.

elsien

My only experience of speaking at a planning permission meeting is that myself and most of the other objectors got together first to make sure we covered all the relevant points between us. 

No point having several people banging on about the same thing and other valid points getting missed.

 No ABCD for you because this is just a narrative of my experience. 

- Planning officer recommended granting planning permission.
- Planning permission was refused by the committee,  in line with the comments above that it wasn’t an application that local people wanted and councillors didn’t want to be seen to be agreeing with it. 
- Applicant (big supermarket chain) appealed.
- Second planning meeting - Planning officer pointed out the cost implications to the council of the applicant making a legal  challenge if their grounds for refusal were not strong enough.
- Council granted planning permission.

Make of that what you will. 

I was particularly miffed at a local councillor who I knew well making a break for the toilet at the vital moment just before they needed to vote in order to avoid having to do so.  

And you also have to sit through a lot of other members of the public making points on other planning decisions if you are further down the list. Less debate than I would have expected. Chair keeps it all in order. Perfectly polite until the vote when members of the public disagree with the decision being made.