Agenda item

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT

Minutes:

The Committee received a report accompanied by a presentation which provided an overview and progress on the Council’s approach to Planning Enforcement.

 

The Cabinet Member for Rural Affairs, Community Cohesion and Planning Policy introduced the report highlighting that the Council had a discretionary role for taking whatever enforcement action was necessary within its area as the Local Planning Authority in the public interest. The importance of an effective planning enforcement service in seeking to ensure that national and local planning policies were robustly and reasonably applied was emphasised.

 

In support of the report the Senior Development and Enforcement Manager took the Committee through the presentation which was appended to the report.  The presentation provided an overview of the planning enforcement system and detailed the enforcement processes and powers available to the Council.

 

The comments/observations raised were responded to as follows:-

 

·       In response to queries regarding the budget and the costs in relation to enforcement and what constituted the public interest not to pursue, the Head of Place and Sustainability explained that there was no budget specifically allocated to Planning Enforcement.  Costs attributed to cases before court proceedings were absorbed through the departmental budget.  In the cases that proceed to Court into potential prosecution/injunction, a business case would be developed and funding would be sought from department reserves, however the Authority’s position was to seek costs from the court but unfortunately this avenue was not reliable.  In regard to the public interest cases, the Head of Place and Sustainability emphasised that pursuing enforcement was part of the public interest test together with the consideration of the harm that cases may have on wider public interest.

 

·       Reference was made to the graph which provided data in relation to the outcomes of more and less than 84 days.  It was asked, what was the average days over 84 days?  The Head of Place and Sustainability stated at a guess that that average was running at circa 400.  It was clarified that the average was recorded when a case was resolved, however in the reported data there was a disproportionate impact on the average figures by the inclusion of recently resolved historic cases.  However, in order to monitor performance, the department analysed the data by excluding the data in regard to the historic cases.  The Senior Enforcement and Monitoring Officer explained the data in more detail including the appeal data.

 

·       It was commented that since the introduction of the Hwb, Local Members were now required to go through the same discipline as their ward residents in order to gain a response to enforcement matters.  It was suggested that  improving the communication to local members could avoid potential animosity caused in these emotive matters.  The Head of Place and Sustainability stated that this matter was currently being re-considered as a project, the suggestions received by members would be taken into consideration to improve the enforcement communication process.

 

·       It was asked, how long does it take for officers to attend a site after the initial enforcement notice?  The Senior Development and Enforcement Manager explained that each valid enforcement case would go through a triage process.  The triage process was formulated by three priority levels which included the consideration of the significant impact on the environment, a person’s amenity, and the degree of potential damage.  Based the consideration of priority levels are made up of; Priority 1 – immediate response, Priority 2 – between 5 & 10 days, Priority 3 – between 10 & 15 days

 

·       It was commented that as communication was key particularly in matters relating to enforcement, it was suggested that it would be helpful for local members to have more information to enable informed conversations with the complainants and ease chase up e-mails.

 

UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the Planning Enforcement report be received.

 

Supporting documents: