Agenda item

Report to follow

James Doe apologised to members for the report being late, however there had been some inaccuracies within the Corvu system which he wanted to correct. He raised the following points from the report:

·        Building Control – the income was strong and they have exceeded the target, however it hasn’t been an easy year due to the increase in workload. Staff retention has been difficult and therefore the service has had to use agency staff.

·        Planning applications – workload has increased, there were 2500 applications in 2015/16 and the income had also increased by 30% to £950k. Teams work pro-actively with applications in order to get it right first time

Questions & Answers

Councillor Ransley asked where DBC’s priority stood between planning for new houses and encouraging new businesses within the estate.
James Doe said that they encourage housing within urban areas. They can only encourage businesses to get apprenticeships in local businesses.

Councillor Riddick was interested to note that Building Control performance had increased, however the service was down on staff.

Councillor Riddick referred to the refusal rate for planning applications compared to the fact that not all appeals are successful. He asked what the difference was on those received.

James Doe replied that the council’s defence rate for appeals was very good.

Councillor Riddick asked if any further resources could be added to the planning enforcement team.
James Doe replied that the team were already relatively resourced and they were dealing with many issues. He noted that there were no further resources available. He added that a national issue was the level of evidence needed to take enforcement action and it must be correct to avoid any compensation claims.

Councillor Hicks said that members of the public have expressed concerns around the accessibility of planning officers.
James Doe explained that people can apply to the team for a pre-application advice meeting or they can seek officer guidance by booking an appointment. The teams’ objectives were to hit targets and ensure positive performance.

Councillor Hicks asked how councillors can oppose applications within the borough.
James Doe explained that they can use the relevant policies if needed, for example a site is an area used for a designated purpose.

Councillor Hearn referred to the core strategy which makes requirements to have provisions for traveller sites, but he asked how this compared to the need for locations.
James Doe explained that the core strategy was the requirement to undertake the need as a whole borough, but the exact locations were done more locally.

Councillor Hearn continued to ask if it was clearly established that Dacorum needed more traveller sites.
James Doe replied that there had been a localised study which resulted in a requirement of 17 sites for the borough. The surrounding areas and locality would be looked at, but he assured members that the sites identified for Dacorums needs were met.

Councillor Fisher asked for an explanation as to how the application process works.
James Doe told members that advice was on the council’s website. He added that the process was transparent, directly affected neighbours are contacted and all details of the application are available on the website and in the office.

James Doe then gave a presentation to the committee showing the end of year review.

Councillor Wyatt-Lowe was fascinated to see the amount of work going into the regeneration of the town.

Councillor Collins asked what the parking arrangements were for the Symbio site application.

James Doe replied that there would be an underground automated/electrical system.

Outcome

The committee noted the report and thanked James Doe for the very professional presentation.