(Epping Forest District Council) To receive verbal reports from the Assistant Directors of Governance, Simon Hill, and Development Management, Nigel Richardson, as detailed below:
· Review of Planning Protocol;
· Criteria for the extent of neighbour consultation on applications; and
· Update on the review of the Local List.
Minutes:
The Assistant Directors of Governance, S Hill, and Development Management, N Richardson, were in attendance to present this planning item.
Review of Planning Protocol
S Hill addressed the meeting and said that some parish councils would know that the Council had carried out some further work on its Constitution last year. In fact it had been completely overhauled over the last eighteen months to make it more understandable, which was completed last March, except for a review of the Planning Protocol, and Guidance on Gifts and Hospitability. The Planning Protocol had last been reviewed in 2007 so it was now timely to review so members did not transgress the Code of Conduct, particularly around planning, and this should be completed during 2017/18. The Council would be seeking local councils’ views on this Protocol and a members training session had been held in June. As the Council’s Deputy Monitoring Officer, he said that most of the complaints he received were around planning. Once this draft had been reviewed by the Constitution Working Group on 28 September 2018 then he would circulate it for those worried by the protocol if they were dual hatted members or if members were unsure of any aspect. The new planning protocol would help the understand and further training would be available, which would be open to parish councils. He also added that there was an extra training session on the Code of Conduct on 2 October 2017, which would be the last chance to attend this municipal year (MY). The Chairman of the Standards Committee has recently written to all parish councils urging them to attend the training course. Officers had been meeting to discuss, particularly in relation to the emerging Local Plan, the increased pressure on planning officers from the applications likely with the release of land. A wider review of the planning process was required to deal with these implications and this would be reviewed at the Constitution Working Group meeting on 28 October 2017 and was circulated with the agenda.. This would hopefully be completed by the end of the MY. S Hill remarked that the parish councils could always contact him with any issues they had on code of conduct and protocol.
V Evans, Epping Upland Clerk, asked about the monitoring of enforcement on planning issues, to which N Richardson replied that at the Cabinet meeting on 7 September 2017, Councillor J Philip (Planning & Governance Portfolio Holder) had reported the establishment of a new post for a Compliance Officer within Development Management. The officer would be checking that works granted planning permission were correct for the Building Control application submitted, but these could be approved by independent inspectors.
Criteria for the extent of neighbour consultation on applications
N Richardson said the Council had carried out an internal audit on this and the result given in the Executive Report was that it was operating satisfactorily, so he was pleased with this outcome. The Council did consult adjoining neighbours, but under current legislation was only required to put out site notices. The Council did use site notices (yellow notices) for fairly major developments, or where the owner of the adjoining land was not known. The site notices were left on public display for 21 days. Development management processed 2,300 applications, plus minor applications, so they carried out a lot of consultation. The comments received by the public were checked to ensure that they were material to planning issues.
Councillor J H Whitehouse asked for more information on the consultation parameters. N Richardson explained that if the proposal was for an extension on a house, then only the immediate adjoining neighbours would be consulted, and sometimes opposite when the development was at the front. If the application was for a housing development then Development Management would write to residents in the local area. The extent of neighbour consultation was worked out by officers looking at the GIS system. The Council decided who could be materially affected by a development. He was hoping that the GIS system would in the future automatically choose the neighbours to be consulted. He acknowledged that it was difficult to monitor if site notices were taken down unless the Council was informed this had happened.
Councillor G Mohindra asked what a neighbour could do if they were upset that they had not been consulted. N Richardson replied that a neighbour had no right of appeal, but the Council would consider the decision and write to the resident.
K O’Brien, Buckhurst Hill Clerk, explained that residents had complained in the past to the parish council that these neighbour consultation letters had been received after the parish council had considered an application at a meeting, and lost the opportunity to speak at local level. N Richardson commented that he if this was the case then there would only be further consultation if for instance amendments or revisions were made to the original application. The Chairman asked the Clerk if he would contact N Richardson afterwards with some specific examples.
Councillor M Sartin asked if the owner could perhaps put up a site notice on their own property. N Richardson replied that this would be resource heavy though it could possibly be sent to agents, but he did not have the resources for straightforward householder extensions. He might do more in rural areas as it was not always obvious who owned the neighbouring land.
Councillor R Gadsby commented that a larger font on the site notices would be helpful.
Update on the review of the Local List
The Local List was last done in 2006 and the Council would like to review this as the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that talked about non-designated heritage assets had come in and there would be a policy in the emerging Local Plan. The most difficult issue was to have the resources and officers’ time to make site visits. Buckhurst Hill parish wanted a conservation area which the Council was looking at currently. He commented that the London Borough of Islington had used volunteers to bring forward a Local List, so local councils could look at and decide what could go on into a Local List, but this would need to be monitored and also require resources to check any proposals submitted.
Resolved:
(1) S Hill to circulate the new Planning Protocol after the Constitution Working Group had reviewed this at the meeting on 28 September 2017 and consult with local councils to seek their views.
(1) An extra members’ training session on the Code of Conduct had been organised for 2 October 2017 which was also open to local council representatives.