Council admits error after approving planning application from councillor under delegated powers

Marcus Kravis who represents Somerset’s Dunster division and is the owner of ‘the Arkade’ in Minehead, had applied for permission to change the use of a set of disused toilets and office space on the site to “amusement arcade floor area and ancillary storage”.

Planning permission was granted to expand the amusement arcade under delegated powers in November 2025.

But according to a report considered by the planning committee a month later, the decision was "contrary to provisions of the constitution", which provides that planning applications brought by members of the council must be considered and decided by the planning committee itself.

"The decision, having not been made in accordance with the correct procedures is, therefore open to legal challenge," the officer’s report said.

It added: "To the applicant’s credit, it was they, themself, who pointed the error out to the local planning authority immediately upon receipt of the decision notice granting planning permission.

“It should also be made clear that the oversight was not as the result of any failing on the part of Councillor Kravis or his planning agent."

Cllr Kravis had ticked the box on his application stating that the applicant was either an elected member or employee of the council, according to the report.

The council said this should have been picked up during the processing of the application and the recommendation should have automatically been referred to the planning committee for their consideration and decision.

Listing the options open to the planning committee and Cllr Kravis, the report noted that the local authority could apply to the courts for a judicial review of the decision or Cllr Kravis could submit a further, identical planning application.

However, the report said it "would seem to be overkill to go through either of the processes outlined above given that no party has been materially prejudiced".

Instead, it recommended that councillors debate the planning permission with a view to endorsing the decision to grant planning permission and resolve to allow the six-week period for seeking judicial review to expire without the council formally challenging its own decision.

This would avoid incurring the "considerable costs" of a legal challenge.

It added: "If the council does nothing (and no other party seeks to challenge the decision within the relevant time-period for doing so) then after the expiry of the 6-week period on 2 January 2026, the applicant will be able to rely upon his planning permission, as the lawfulness of the decision could no longer be challenged.

“Of course, if the West Planning Committee resolves that it would not have granted planning permission for the proposed development under 3/21/25/018, then measures should be put in place to prepare and submit a legal challenge to the Courts with a Consent Order asking that the original decision be formally quashed."

However, Cllr Kravis went on to submit a second planning application for the changer of use.

The council will now consider the application again in the new year.

Adam Carey