Agenda item

Q2 Planning, Development and Regeneration Quarterly reports

Minutes:

PStanley provided the update, noting the generally positive performance for planning applications and completing applications in time. The service has faced pressures in terms of vacancies and two new planning officers have been recruited with a lead planning officer starting in January. The reported KPI remains a poor figure with a further reduction down to 49%, though the additional enforcement officer only started at the beginning of October and a second agency enforcement officer will be starting in the coming weeks. In October, 66 cases were closed, compared to an average of around 30 in the previous 3 months. It was noted that cases that were previously in abeyance will now be looked at, which will effect the first site visit time and it is therefore anticipated that the first site visit time will increase in Q4. The live case load figure has now reduced down to 400 and the team continue to focus on the service of notices and a further 7 notices were served in the quarter with 12 ongoing enforcement appeals.

 

Cllr Guest referred to paragraph 1.7 on enforcement site visits and noted the focus on the most harmful breaches. Cllr Guest asked if the same will be said to the Development and Management Committee. PStanley advised that the report to the Development and Management Committee focuses on enforcement cases where formal action has been taken and doesn't provide an overarching figure of cases. Cases causing most harm will be reported and the next enforcement update will be given in January.

 

Cllr Guest next looked to paragraph 1.11 on retail properties, noting that no data is available for the period due to the reliance on external parties. Cllr Guest asked if figures are available for properties owned by the Council. JDoe advised that there has been an issue with some footfall counters and this is why there is no information available and that the Council doesn't do footfall counts for the local centres. The Council has data on occupancy and he would look into the issue on footfall counters.

 

Cllr Guest referred to the number of vacant retail properties and asked if this figure is available. JDoe confirmed that they will have direct information on any vacancies in district centres around Hemel Hempstead and that this information can be obtained.

 

ACTION: To provide update on issues with footfall counters. (JDoe)

 

ACTION: To provide update on number of vacant retail properties. (JDoe)

 

Cllr Walker commented that it would be helpful to list the expected rent of vacant properties. JDoe advised that whilst the issue of vacancy and activity is a matter for the Committee, the income is a matter for the Finance and Resources Committee.

 

Cllr Timmis referred to planning enforcement and noted the recruitment of further planning enforcement resource. Cllr Timmis asked how long the new roles are recruited for and whether they would be long-term roles. PStanley explained that the received reserves funding for the roles has provided 16 months' worth of agency resource and that they have currently been appointed on a 6-month basis, with the intention that the highest performing recruit will then be extended to 10 months.

 

Cllr Timmis suggested that funding for a permanent position is required. The Chair commented that there should be a strong steer from the Committee on having this role included in the budget and that this should be a priority.

 

PStanley advised that the intention is for the existing team to be able to handle a sustainable caseload and that they need to assess if a team of 3 can deal with 300 cases. PStanley advised that they currently require the additional resources to get the team to this sustainable point.

 

Cllr Timmis noted the number of cases closed and asked if these cases were enforced or have been dropped. PStanley explained that closed cases mean the file is no longer open and that this can be due to there being no planning breach, that a breach was regularised, that an enforcement notice was complied with or that there was a breach and no action was taken due to the minor size or scale of the breach.

 

Supporting documents: