Agenda item

To consider the report of the Planning Development Officer.

The Committee received the report of the Planning Enforcement Officer which explained Local Planning Authority’s (LPA’s) power to issue as well as the scope of Section 215 Notices and discussed the practical implications and effectiveness of doing so. It also provided data on the use of such notices within the Planning Enforcement team and other authorities.

Members had requested a report asking about performance in Planning Enforcement and detailing what action has been taken under Section 215 (s.215) of the Town & Country Planning Act (1990). Research had been undertaken of the legislation, the Council’s use of Section 215 and benchmarking data collected from nearby authorities, as well as service performance being examined.

Officers explained that there had been a reduction of around 300 historical planning enforcement cases, and the number of formal complaints had reduced. The Committee noted that a sub-group would be set up to monitor planning enforcement, with a proposed membership of the Chair of Planning Committee, the Head of Planning and a Planning Enforcement Officer; although Officers confirmed that they were open to suggestions as to membership of the group. The Chair of the Committee confirmed that he would speak to Officers about this after the meeting.

Members of the Committee expressed their frustrations in relation to recurring enforcement issues, such as contractor parking at a development in Eggborough and ongoing problems at Wistow Road in Selby. There was a perceived lack of action on such cases by Members.

Officers acknowledged that there were ongoing problems with some cases, but that enforcement action was taken and that the national guidance encouraged resolution in such matters through the submission of planning applications and within the planning process.

Members explained the frustrations experienced by both residents and Councillors who were dealing with ongoing issues and asked Officers to consider these points of view when dealing with enforcement matters.

The Committee noted that whilst the performance of planning enforcement had improved, it was a difficult area in which to quantify performance, and that the number of Section 215 notices issues should not be used as a measure. Officers explained that Section 215 notices could be useful as a threat of action, thereby making subsequent negotiation more effective.

Officers also explained that the Planning Enforcement Management Plan had been written in order to give clarity to the process, and that should the view of Members be that it requires amendment, this could be looked at. With regards to planning enforcement, improvements had been made but it was acknowledged that there was still work to do. There had been a high backlog of cases which had taken time to work through and Officers were doing all they could to improve the situation.

The Executive Member for Place Shaping explained to the Committee that the number of planning applications submitted to the Council for consideration had grown exponentially over the past few years, and as such, these applications generated more complaints and enforcement issues. The Executive Member went on to say that his experience of the planning enforcement team had been positive and that they had been focusing on the most important issues; public interest, confidentiality and clarity were key, with Officers often having a difficult job in keeping different parties informed at the same time.

Committee Members acknowledged that the situation had improved, but that public perception was key, and they often wanted issues resolved as quickly as possible, and may not always understand why it is such a complicated process. Officers explained that they did their best to describe the process of resolution and to prioritise action, and were open to comments and changes to the policy if required.

Members noted that the planning enforcement and planning teams were encouraged to work collaboratively, and that the correct legal support was also essential to the team’s ability to resolve cases. Officers confirmed that current staffing levels were at the levels that the service had budgeted for, including extra contingency support. There were current vacancies in the planning team but these were being recruited to at present.

The Committee asked for confirmation from Officers of the number of cases resolved prior to 2018; it was agreed that this figure would be checked and circulated to Members after the meeting.

In relation to Section 215 notices, Officers explained that in order to work out the costings for direct action to be taken as a result of Section 215 Notices, a number of matters needed to be considered, including the potential need for tenders, availability of local firms to undertake the process, the scale of the work and cost recovery.

Some Members felt that Section 215 Notices should be used more regularly by the Council for enforcement matters, and that the appropriate legal support and budgets should be identified to undertake the work internally; it was also agreed by the Committee that there should be more communications work about planning enforcement, especially successful cases.

RESOLVED:

i.       To note the report.

ii.     To suggest that Officers consider the membership of the Planning Enforcement Sub-Group in consultation with the Chair of Scrutiny Committee.

iii.    To ask Officers to supply the Committee with details of the number of planning enforcement cases resolved prior to 2018, after the meeting.

iv.    To ask Officers to undertake more communications work around planning enforcement.