Agenda and minutes

(Head of Research and Democratic Services). To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

None reported.

(Head of Research and Democratic Services). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

Councillors Mrs D Collins, Ms S Stavrou and Mrs A Cooper declared personal, non prejudicial interests in matters relating to Paynes Lane, Nazeing.

(a)            Paynes Lane, Nazeing

The Head of Planning and Economic Development reported on discussions held with the glasshouse operators adjacent to the site. It had became clear that the company plans involving securing, clearance work and building a glasshouse on part of the site breached planning policy. He asked the Panel to feed back comments on the approach the Council should take to remediation work. The Head of Environmental Services would report this to the Consultant.

The Panel noted their discussions with residents of Paynes Lane and the assurance given that action would be undertaken to deal with the site.

Recommended that the work agreed by the Cabinet be pursued as a matter of priority.

(b)               Birchfield and Hamlett Hill

Noted that steps had been taken to clear up the site at Birchfield  involving the removal of the top layer of the land. Reference was made to the outstanding planning appeal which had now been determined against the applicants and access issues. In relation to Hamlett Hill noted that there were still outstanding clear up issues.

To consider the attached guidance and advice from Counsel.

The Head of Planning and Environmental Development presented the circular.

He referred to changes to the definition of a gypsy/traveller and possible implications of this for the District. The changes might impact on the number of application submitted by travellers and contained advise on identifying sites. The Circular explored the feasibility of sites in urban areas and associated infrastructure issues. Envisaged that the Local Development Framework would comprise provisions reflecting the changes.

Noted the circular suggested that the number of ‘mixed sites’ used for both residential and business purposes should be increased. Concern was expressed about this.

Reported that the first draft of the new Local Plan contained no real changes to traveller policy. The Policy recognised that the Council was a Green Belt Authority and that special circumstances must be demonstrated before a development could be granted. This could restrict the Councils ability to provide more traveller sites. The Circular considered the option of removing land from the Green Belt for the provision of sites to address needs. The Panel noted how this might work.

Noted that it was expected that the new Local Development would explore Traveller Housing needs. The Council had already responded to the Circular.

Recommended that the information circulated at the meeting on applications authorised be updated on a regular basis and available to Members for consideration.

The Panel concluded that the issues in the Circular could not be determined over a short timescale and therefore more suited to Standing Panel review.

Considered the impact on officer time and resources of providing/ maintaining Transit Sites.

To consider the attached information.

The Head of Planning and Economic Development presented the study.

In response considered issues around ownership of authorised private sites and how these might be funded by the occupants. A Members suggested the possibility of involving  Housing Associations in the management of sites.

The Panel considered page 69 comprising a recent count of traveller caravans across Essex showing the position for Epping Forest. This indicated that the District accommodated 157 caravans, exceeding the totals attributed to most other areas in the County. This was possible because of the Districts proximity to London which facilitated traveller business activity.

Suggested that a two fold approach be taken involving:

(a)        Action to deal with unauthorised sites;

(b)        The provision of new sites to address the needs assessments

Recommendations:

(1)        To amend the work programme in view of the decision by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to allocate policy matters on Traveller issues to the Environmental and Planning Services Standing Panel and;

(2)        To agree a reporting deadline for each work programme item.

(Chairman/Lead Officer). The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference and Work Programme for this Panel. This is attached. The Panel is asked to consider both documents at each meeting.

·                     Specific/Ongoing Policy Issues

The Panel will be aware that the OSC recently added to the remit of the Environmental and Planning Services Standing Panel the task of developing Traveller policy matters. The Committee has also agreed that this Panel be continued to focus on action regarding specific sites. The Panel is asked to consider this decision when reviewing the work programme and determine whether on – going policy issues should be referred to the Standing Panel.

·                     Reporting Deadlines

The Panel is reminded of the need to allocate timescales to their items. In particular, the Panel is asked to consider whether they are likely to achieve reporting deadlines which fall within the timescale envisaged for Task and Finish reviews. (in practice - the end of this year). Should it be anticipated that this cannot be achieved for any items, the Panel may wish to consider whether such outstanding items should be referred back to the OSC or the Environmental and Planning Services Standing Panel for consideration.

Recommended:

That the Task and Finish Panel be disbanded and;

That the Environmental and Planning Services Standing Panel be asked to monitor issues in item 1

That the items yet to be determined – (namely items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) be referred to the Standing Panel for consideration and action due to the likely timescales involved.

ACTION:

Head of Planning and Economic Development and Chairman to draft final report covering work undertaken by Panel and the above recommendations for the OSC on 6 July 2006.

To consider which reports, if any, are ready to be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

Final Report of the Panel.