Issue - meetings

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report and plan.

The Committee noted that at its last meeting on 16 October 2013, it had agreed to adopt the Local Enforcement Plan. As part of the Committees decision, the Assistant Director of Planning was authorised to consider any further comments made by Local Council’s and report further to this Committee if material changes to the plan were required.

During the previous consultation process it has become apparent that a number of Town and Parish Councils had been omitted from the initial consultation process. The Councils concerned (Loughton, Ongar, Stanford Rivers, Stapleford Abbotts, Stapleford Tawney, Theydon Mount and Theydon Garnon) had been further consulted.

Loughton Town Council had made comments and had requested that where it was decided by District Council Officers that further action was inexpedient under Sections 3.25 to 3.31 (Chapter 3 Investigation of suspected breaches of planning control: Not expedient to pursue formal action) of the protocol, that decision should stand referred to an Area Planning Subcommittee if within 21 days of publication of the decision it was:

(a)        called in by a member of Epping Forest District Council; or

(b)        called in by the parish or town council in whose area the site fell.

The Committee had previously discussed whether such a mechanism was appropriate and noted that robust procedures were already in place within the plan. As such they considered that no further changes should be made to the plan.

Resolved:

(1)        That the comments of Loughton Town Council be noted; and

(2)        That the Local Enforcement Plan (LEP) as previously adopted be confirmed without further changes.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report and plan.

The Committee considered a draft Local Enforcement Plan (LEP) which set out the Council’s vision for planning enforcement. It was noted that the Planning Services Scrutiny Panel had reviewed the proposed document at its meeting on 10 September 2013 and had endorsed its adoption.

The Committee made suggestions as to minor redrafting of the plan but expressed their concern that in implementing the plan, the Cabinet should allocate sufficient funding to allow its full implementation particularly in the area of direct action where insufficient budget provision existed currently.

It was also noted that during the Local Council consultation period some authorities had been omitted. It was agreed that any subsequent comments should be considered by the Assistant Director of Planning Services and brought back to this Committee if he considered material changes were needed to the plan.

Resolved:

(1)        That the Local Enforcement Plan (LEP) (as amended attached) be adopted in conformity with the suggestion for such a plan contained within the National Planning Policy Framework;

(2)        That the Committee calls upon the Cabinet to allocate sufficient funding to ensure that the Local Enforcement Plan can be properly implemented; and

(3)        That the Assistant Director Planning Services be authorised to consider further comments of Local Council’s and report further to this Committee if material changes to the plan were required.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report and plan.

The Panel received the draft Local Enforcement Plan (LEP) from the Assistant Director of Planning and Economic Development (Development Control).

The Government had introduced, as part of the new localism agenda, the National Planning Policy Framework. Section 207 of the Framework stated that “planning authorities should consider publishing a local enforcement plan to manage enforcement proactively” and they should set out how they would “monitor the implementation of planning permissions, investigate alleged cases of unauthorised development.”

Whilst the production of an LEP was not compulsory, it was recognised as an action target in the Planning and Economic Development Plan 2013-14. The adoption of such an LEP helped safeguard against enforcement actions being open to challenge from parties enforced against on the basis that the Council had not formally adopted such a plan. Although planning enforcement was a discretionary power of the Council, the LEP stated the authority’s vision of readiness in taking effective action when justified. The Plan set out the principles of good enforcement and investigation, explaining what would and would not be investigated. The Plan set out the priorities for responses to complaints and clarified the timescales for response by officers.

The Planning Enforcement Team received a high number of allegations of breaches of planning control, it was impossible to investigate all of these allegations with equal priority. Resources were limited, therefore the LEP made clear what breaches were and the prioritisation involved.

The powers involved in taking formal enforcement action were detailed below:

(a)  Enforcement Notice

This was the method of remedying unauthorised development, with a right of appeal against the notice. Failure to comply was a criminal offence.

(b)  Breach of Condition Notice

The notice could be used where planning permission conditions were not complied with.

(c)  Stop Notice

The notice could be used in conjunction with an enforcement notice where the planning control breach was causing irreparable and immediate significant harm.

(d)  Temporary Stop Notice

These took immediate effect from the moment of issue and lasted up to 28 days.

(e)  Section 215 Notice

This notice could be used in relation to untidy land or buildings when the condition of the land, or buildings, adversely affected the amenity of an area.

(f)   Direct Action

The Council could enter land and take necessary action to secure compliance when enforcement notices were in effect.

(g)  Injunction

This involved seeking an order from the court preventing an activity or operation taking place.

RECOMMENDED:

That the draft Local Enforcement Plan be endorsed and recommended to the District Development Control Committee.