To discuss the following matters raised by Local Council’s:
(a) Community Bus Service
Local representatives have requested a discussion on the Community Bus Service and the desirability of extending the scheme. Angela Canham of Voluntary Action Epping Forest will be in attendance to report and answer questions.
(b) East of England Plan
Local Councils have requested that consideration be given to this issue as the Inspector's report on the East on England Plan is due for publication this month.
(c) EFDC Local Plan
Local Councils have requested that consideration is given to the EFDC Local Plan as the Inspectors report may be out and available for consideration by the date of this meeting.
(d) Local Development Framework
Local representatives have requested that consideration is given to the recent consultation document on the new Local Development Framework.
(e) Development Control – Performance Targets
Local Members have expressed the view that the drive to satisfy the 8-week target is having a negative impact on the quality of decisions and service to both applicants and objectors. Examples have been given of planning decisions being made peremptorily without time being given to make minor amendments that could have led to agreement between both sides. There is concern that the emphasis on enforcement has lessened (because it is not a national target) and the backlog of cases is as bad as before. It was recognised that several serious cases have and are taking up a lot of time with insufficient capacity to deal with mundane issues. Councils would like to know the current backlog and recent rate of clearance as well as a forecast as to when an acceptable balance might be reached.
(f) Refuse Collection – Current Position
At the last meeting of the Committee on 1 March 2006, representatives expressed concern over performance in this area. This further discussion will enable officers to brief Members on the latest developments.
Minutes:
(a) Refuse Collection
The Head of Environmental Services reported the current position.
He reported that in mid April 2006, the then Council’s waste contractor South Herts Waste Management went into administration. During this period in anticipation of this the Council engaged in discussions with alternatives waste companies including Cory Environmental Municipal Services Limited (Cory) who have since taken over the service. The system had now been in place for one month and was working well. Collection performance had improved. However, problems were still occurring in certain areas and some collections were still being missed. This was under investigation. The Council had entered into an initial three month agreement with Cory. Negotiations would also ensure over the possibility of them taking over the existing contract up until the end date of 2009. In the event that this was not pursed the contact would be subject to the usual procurement route to identify another contractor. The company had invested additional resources into the service resulting in real improvements. Telephone call about missed collections and more general issues had subsided. Local representatives congratulated the service for the overall improvements and expressed appreciation at the recent presentation given by David Marsh, the District Council Principal waste management officer. The Head of Environmental Services undertook to report these sentiments back to the staff involved in the refuse collection service.
Alongside the above, action had continued to implement the wheeled bin service to be completed by the end of this calendar year. The report due to be submitted to the Cabinet regarding enforcement policy for the recycling arrangements had been delayed. The new Portfolio Holder for Environmental Protection wished to review the new service and allow it to settle down first before making a decision on this aspect to be reported to the Cabinet.
A local representatives reported that the system appeared to be working well in the rural areas. The Head of Environmental Services undertook to make available the schedule for the waste paper collection service.
A Member referred to concerns raised by an Elderly Persons Advisory Group who were confused about collections times and schedules. Flats were still using black sacks with a weekly collection service. Discussions would be held over how best to introduce a recycling system for such dwellings. The Head of Environmental Services stated that if this was not happening they should let him know.
RESOLVED:
That Environmental Services be congratulated for vastly improving the refuse collection service
(b) Community Bus Services – ‘Shop and Go Service’
The Chairman introduced and welcomed Sue – De Luca of Chigwell Parish Council who reported on the ‘Shop and Go’ Bus Service.
Councillor E Borton of Nazeing Parish Council reported that Councillor Thompson of Moreton Bobbingworth and the Lavers Parish Council had raised this item for two reasons: the concern that the charge levelled against his Parish Council (one of the smallest in the consortium set up to run the group) was too much and to encourage more Local Councils to join the scheme.
Ms DeLuca reported some background to the service. Following discussions with County Councillor G McEwen and a meeting arranged by Essex County Council, a transport needs survey was undertaken. Arising from this the ‘Shop and Go’ Service was established for any persons who experienced problems accessing public transport either because they were physically unable to or because they lived in a remote rural location. The service was run by a cluster group and Essex County Council.
Local Councils were contacted about the service which now comprised six Local Councils. No clerks from the smaller Councils responded to this officer. Consequently, Ms Deluca alongside Mr B Whittome, the clerk for Epping Town Council had taken up informal voluntary positions in the cluster group from offices at Epping Town Council and Chigwell Parish Council. Additional funding had recently been made available for the service which would be presented this month by Essex County Council. Ms DeLuca stated that all participating Councils were charged the same price for the service and welcomed other to join. It was clarified that the cluster group and the Epping Forest Community Transport Scheme were two separate schemes yet a Council must be a Member of the former to participate in the ‘Shop- and Go’ service. It was reported that in future non Members would not be able to use the service. The County Portfolio Holder R Bass had welcomed the additional funding allocated to the service and was of the view that the provision was relied upon and well used.
(c) East of England Plan – Inspectors Report
The District Council’s Principal Planning Officer advised that the report was due out on the 14 June 2006. The Council had not yet received the proposals but were expecting a hardcopy version of it tomorrow (22 June 2006) which would be circulated. He set out the timetable for the process. Based on the Inspectors report, the Secretary of State would produce proposals in September/October 2006. The final plan was expected in Spring 2007. It was requested that further consideration be given to the plan at the next meeting of the Committee in November 2006.
RESOLVED:
That consideration be given to the East of England Plan at the next meeting in November 2006.
(d) EFDC Local Plan
The Council had now received the Inspectors report which agreed most of its policies including glasshouse policies for the Roydon and Nazeing areas. Additional provisions had been added on ‘lifetime homes’. The final version was due out in 23 June 2006. The report was binding on the Council so no further amendments could be made to this final version. The Portfolio Holder had delegated powers to adopt the revisions and was expected to do so in July 2006.
(e) Local Development Framework
The District Council’s Principal Planning Officer reported that a statement of community involvement setting out the consultation process for the framework went out in April 2006. A further version was due to go out in shortly taking into account comments received to date.
(f) Development Control Performance Targets
The District Council Assistant Head of Planning Servicesreferred to the concern raised by Local representatives that the eight week planning target for the determination of planning applications was having a detrimental effect on the quality of the service. He advised that the District Council had no influence over this target and explained the risks associated with not achieving it including the implications for the Planning Delivery Grant. He advised that the emphasis being placed on the aim had meant that certain services for applicants had been set aside resulting in more refusals. However, such outcomes resulted in further consultation so no issues were missed. Experience suggested that applicants wanted firstly approval for their applications rather than a speedy decision. Concerns had been raised at the effect efforts to meet the target was having on the quality of the service and the end result. A Planning Contact Team had been set up to address this and the Website had been approved.
It was clarified that there was no relationship between enforcement and the issues around the target for the speed of decision making as it was a separate service. In terms of enforcement performance it was reported that statistics indicated that the Council cleared 427 open investigations at 12 June 2006, resolved 167 enforcement cases during the first quarter of the year and by 1 April 2006 determined 150 of the 196 cases received.
Officer time was often absorbed by work on large impact cases which was time consuming.
Since the end of March 2006, the team had been operating with one vacancy. The post had recently been offered to an experienced enforcement officer. The service was aware of the problems however work was being carried out to address this.