To consider the draft Planning Enforcement Plan prior to consideration by the Executive.

The Enforcement & Appeals Team Leader introduced a report that set out the draft Planning Enforcement Plan for Central Bedfordshire.  Further information in relation to changes to the document was also circulated to the Committee at the meeting.  The document was a revision of the Central Bedfordshire Planning Enforcement Policy that was adopted by the Council in 2009 and had been updated in line with Government guidance and changes in legislation.  In addition the Executive Member Sustainable Communities (Strategic Planning and Economic Development) drew attention to the timescales for high priority cases; guidance relating to unauthorised gypsy and traveller encampments; and whether additional staffing was required at weekends to deliver the plan.

In response to the report and the further clarification provided the Committee discussed several issues in detail as follows:-

·                    The percentage of enforcement cases that were considered to be ‘high priority’.  It was clarified that most cases were ‘medium’ priority, only a few cases were ‘high’ priority relating to tree preservation orders, listed buildings or gypsy and traveller encampments.  In these cases ‘immediate’ action was necessary.  It was noted that the Council’s opinion of a ‘high’ priority was not always the same as the publics.

·                    Whether existing staff in other departments would be able to provide additional capacity to deliver a service over the weekend.  It was commented that a temporary member of staff in the Planning Enforcement Team had been appointed for 6-months but the capacity of staff to fulfil this additional work would need to be considered.

·                    Specific cases of enforcement in which ward Councillors and Town and Parish Councillors had not been given equal priority when raising an incident.  It was commented that more work was necessary to ensure that the Council took appropriate action when a matter was referred by a Town and Parish Councillor.

·                    The importance of being able to check that work had been undertaken within the proposed timescales.

·                    Whether the references to timescales for low priority cases within the current draft plan were appropriate.  The Committee agreed that references should be amended to read “a site visit will be made as soon as practicable but at most within 10 days”.

·                    The lack of clarity relating to reporting alleged breaches of planning control at paragraph 3.2.  It was agreed that references to equal priority in this paragraph would be amended.

·                    The timescales within which the Council may serve an Enforcement Order for concealed development.  It was clarified that if a development was deliberately concealed for a period of longer than four years the Council could apply for a one year extension at the point at which the development was identified on which action could be taken.

·                    The extent to which the Council enforced planning conditions in some cases.  It was commented that enforcement action had to be proportionate to the size and nature of the development and each case was considered on its own merit.

·                    The flow charts in the draft plan could be improved with several amendments.  Officers agreed to pursue these comments with a Councillor outside the meeting.

·                    Whether cases in the green belt should be considered a priority for enforcement action.  It was clarified that this was addressed in the draft plan.

RECOMMENDED that the Executive Member be requested to consider the comments of the Committee prior to presenting the draft Enforcement Plan to the Executive and in particular consider the feasibility of existing staff providing an enforcement service over the weekends so that immediate action can be taken in relation to high priority cases.