Issue - meetings

To advise the Committee of performance statistics on Development Management, Building Control and Planning Enforcement.

The Committee considered a report on performance statistics for Development Management, Building Control and Planning Enforcement.

The following points were raised in discussion of this item:

• It was reported that Building Control’s records had been affected by the fire at 639 High Road during the riots last August as they had been largely in hard copy. Significant efforts had been made to clean the microfiche records and obtain replacement paper copies, and the records would now be digitised. Mr Dorfman noted that while August and September statistics did show a reduction in performance during this time, this had recovered by October and was a testament to the outstanding work put in by Building Control.
• The Committee asked whether there was a way of presenting the progress of enforcement cases more clearly, such that it was easier to identify the case outcomes and monitor the progress of ongoing cases. It was agreed that Mr Dorfman and Mr Joyce would look into how this could be achieved. Members were invited to forward suggestions on this issue to officers outside the meeting.
• It was agreed that a session would be held for Members covering the various procedures and the steps through which a Planning Enforcement case might progress, looking at several case-studies. Members felt that this would be useful. Members were advised that the service standards as appended to the report on expediency later on the agenda gave an indication of the timescales for different stages of Planning Enforcement cases.
• In respect of 12 Willoughby Road, it was agreed that Cllr Schmitz would pass Mr Joyce’s contact details onto neighbouring properties for information.
• The Committee asked about the status of the 8-week process; it was reported that this had previously been an important indicator as it was linked with funding received – this was no longer the case, and the process was now more qualitative. Where a case was likely to exceed 8 weeks, the authority remained in contact with the applicants to keep them informed of progress and to advise of the likely timescales. Applicants had the right to appeal for non-determination in cases exceeding 8 weeks.
• Members were encouraged to submit questions arising from the reports to officers in advance of the meeting where possible, in order to ensure that the appropriate information could be made available.
• The Committee questioned the Article 4 direction in respect of 152 Gospatrick Road – Mr Joyce agreed to double-check that Article 4 was applicable in this case, although it was noted that regardless of the outcome of this, the site was within a Conservation Area.

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.