Agenda item

To consider information regarding how the Council publicises and consults on planning applications

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 43 to 46, which gave an update on how Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) consulted on planning applications.

The report outlined that WBC followed the statutory obligation to either display a notice on the site for no less than 21 days, or by serving a notice to any adjoining owner or occupier. WBC chose to serve notices to neighbours, and also ask that applicants voluntarily display a site notice which was provided to them. This approach was set out within the statement of community involvement. There were additional requirements for major applications within the Borough.

Wayne Smith (Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement) and Marcia Head (Service Manager – Place and Growth) attended the meeting to answer Member queries.

During the ensuing discussions, Members raised the following points and queries:

·           Some residents had reported that they had not received notices of nearby planning applications. Whilst most objections to applications did not lead to refusals, residents wanted to be consulted and ward members wanted to ensure that residents were engaged and consulted. What exactly was sent out to residents? Officer response – An A5 postcard was sent out with the WBC crest printed on the top of the card. The postcard was not sent in an envelope, and had the planning application details written on it. If there was a sensitive application, then more houses would usually be informed. Residents did not have to be consulted to comment on an application, and many residents spoke to each other about applications which usually led to a comments being left via the WBC planning section on the website for that specific application.

·           The Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement commented that in addition to neighbours being consulted, Town and Parish Councils and local ward members were informed of every planning application in their area. 26,000 postcards had been sent out over the past year, and Covid-19 (C-19) had not slowed the planning process.

·           Had there been a change in the average number of postcards sent out for each application? Officer response – The average was 6 as a usual residential property consulted with three properties, adjoining neighbours and the property to the rear, however larger or more sensitive applications attracted far more postcards which took the average to 6.

·           Was 26,000 postcards per year sufficient to ensure that residents were aware of local planning applications? Officer response – WBC received tens of thousands of comments on planning applications per year. Planning was a balance, where objections had to be weighed up against planning law. Even where an application received no objections, officers still weighed up the impact of the development on the local community.

·           Could the notification system be modernised, via sending consultations digitally? Officer response – This had been looked at in the past via an account system where you could opt-in to receiving digital notifications, however if the homeowner moved then WBC would not be fulfilling their duty to notify immediate neighbours about a planning application. A two-tiered system would be required, which would be a big IT change.

·           Had consultations always been sent out as a postcard? Officer response – Some years ago, letters were sent out within an envelope which was addressed to “The Occupier”. Some people were confused why the letter was not addressed to them, and the letter was then changed to a postcard. Members and Town and parish Councils could ask local applicants to voluntarily place notices on their sites to increase engagement.

·           It was noted that there was a general reluctance for residents to send in comments directly, rather than through a ward member or a Town or Parish Council.

·           Was their scope for a communications exercise, such as within the Borough News, outlining different types of planning applications and what grounds objections could be raised on? Executive Member response – Training had occurred over the past couple of years, and was also planned for this year, around planning and enforcement. Information had also been provided within the Borough news in the past, as well as at Borough events. A piece was planned in the borough news regarding development of one and two bedroom properties within the Borough, and further pieces could also be included, for example relating to HMOs or permitted development rights.

·           As more people were at home over the last year, could this have accounted for more people noticing development and planning applications? Executive Member and officer response – WBC had seen an increase of 89% increase in householder planning applications in the first 5 months of this year compared to last year, and there had also been a significant increase in requests to the planning enforcement teams. Fifty percent of contacts with the planning enforcement teams were not a breach of planning control, but still required a member of the team to visit the site and interact with the landowner. Many residents were seeing buildings being developed and fences being erected, thinking that they all required planning permission. A piece regarding what does and does not require planning permission could be included within WBC’s communications approach.

RESOLVED That:

1)     Wayne Smith and Marcia Head be thanked for attending the meeting;

2)     This issue be raised with the Borough Parish Liaison Forum, with the Chairman of the Committee being invited to the Forum meeting where the issue was to be discussed. This item could then return to the Committee at a later date if required.