Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham RG40 1BN. View directions

Contact: Callum Wernham  Democratic & Electoral Services Specialist

Items
No. Item

63.

Apologies

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

 

Shirley Boyt, Anne Chadwick, and Phil Cunnington attended the meeting virtually, and were therefore marked as in attendance, and they were not able to propose, second, or vote on items

64.

Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 244 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 13 December 2021

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 13 December 2021 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

65.

Declaration of Interest

To receive any declarations of interest.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

66.

Public Question Time

To answer any public questions

 

A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice.

 

The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of this committee.

 

Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Committee or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting.  For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions

Minutes:

There were no public questions.

67.

Member Question Time

To answer any member questions.

Minutes:

There were no Member questions.

68.

Planning Enforcement and Building Control Update pdf icon PDF 922 KB

To consider an update on how Wokingham Borough Council carries out duties relating to Building Control and Planning Enforcement

Minutes:

The Committee considered a presentation, set out in agenda pages 13 to 20, which outlined how Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) carried out its duties in relation to Planning Enforcement and Building Control.

 

The presentation outlined that most planning applications were approved, and most unauthorised development was acceptable and could be regularised through retrospective planning applications. The issuing of an enforcement notice should be used as a last resort, and WBC’s approach to planning enforcement was in line with Government guidance and was set out within the Local Planning Enforcement Plan. A total of 35 enforcement notices were issued by WBC in 2020, and these notices were only served once all other negotiations had failed. Most enforcement notices resulted in an appeal and usually a public enquiry, and WBC had a good track record in winning the majority of enforcement appeals. With regards to Building Control, this was a statutory service which was simultaneously in direct competition with the private sector for all projects regardless of their nature and size. Building Control ensured that building standards were met at the design stage and further critical stages of construction, however Building Control was not a clerk of works service. The enforcement of matters related to Building Control was restricted to one year after the completion of works, whilst prosecution could occur up to two years from completion of works. WBC was also responsible to intervene where there was a category one, serious hazard, in residential accommodation under the Housing Act 2004. WBC was unable to assist in a number of areas, including encroachment and trespass issues, party wall dispute, asbestos, or poor quality of workmanship.

 

Wayne Smith (Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement), Stephen Brown (Interim Assistant Director – Place), Roger Paine (Head of Service - Building Control Solutions), Ed Shaylor (Head of Enforcement and Safety) and Jason Varley (Operational Manager - Development Management & Compliance (Senior Specialist)) attended the meeting to answer Member queries.

 

During the ensuing discussions, Members raised the following points and queries:

 

·           Was WBC deterred from serving enforcement notices due to the expense and resource involved? Officer response – No, officers always looked for the most cost effective and efficient way of resolving issues, and enforcement notices were only issued once all other forms of negotiations had been exhausted.

 

·           To what extent was WBC’s statutory Building Control Service in direct competition with the private sector? Officer response – WBC’s Building Control Service was in direct competition with the private sector, and there were over 100 private companies across the UK, offering clients a wide range of choice.

 

·           Was WBC’s Building Control involved in the Loddon Field development? Officer response – No, this was dealt with by the national house building council, which most national house building companies chose to use.

 

·           Who should be contacted where a private driveway was obstructed by a vehicle parking on the pavement? Officer response – As the pavement was part of the highway, this would be a police matter.

 

·           How many Planning Enforcement officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

69.

MTFP - Movement from Financial Lockdown Version 1 pdf icon PDF 121 KB

To consider the movement within the proposed MTFP from Financial Lockdown Version 1

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 21 to 40, which gave an overview of the movements of the revenue and capital budgetary positions since the publication of financial lockdown version 1.

 

John Kaiser (Executive Member for Finance and Housing) and Graham Ebers (Deputy Chief Executive (Director of Resources and Assets)) attended the meeting to answer Member queries.

 

It was noted that the only addition in terms of concluding the MTFP was a supplementary bid of £250k to cover the inflationary costs of the re-tendering for the supplier of home to school transport after the previous supplier went out of business. The cheapest tender came in at an additional £60k per term when compared to the previous supplier.

 

The Local Government Finance Settlement was only a one year settlement, and a great deal of uncertainty remained with regards to several factors including inflation, adult social care funding, construction costs, and the ongoing implications of the pandemic. Given the level of uncertainty, it was commented that a mid-year review to assess the presumptions made within the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) may be pertinent. The Executive Member commented that officers would have the option of providing a paper to the Executive asking for a supplementary budget estimate should services face additional costs in-year.

 

During the ensuing discussions, Members raised the following points and queries:

 

·           How much additional funding did Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) receive within the Local Government Finance Settlement? Deputy Chief Executive response – WBC had received no revenue support grant, the same business rates as this financial year, a £0.83m reduction in new homes’ bonuses, and additional £0.931m social care grant, and an additional £1.7m in other grants such as Covid-19 support funding. Overall, WBC would receive an additional £1.8m in funding, whilst inflationary pressures alone placed £8m of additional costs on the Council.

 

·           How would the additional £6m in revenue expenditure, after additional grants, be covered? Deputy Chief Executive response – A combination of service efficiencies and increasing Council Tax and the Adult Social Care precept would cover much of the costs. After the additional £250k bid for the re-tendering of home to school transport, approximately £2.5m of the revenue budget would be funded through reserves.

 

·           With regards to the predicted approximate £13m capital budget deficit over the next 3 years, what pending might be reduced to address this? Deputy Chief Executive response – This was the cumulative position of 3 years of spending and it could be addressed in a number of ways, such as re-profiling into future years, reducing the ambition or size of the scheme, finding additional income through grants or capital receipts, or as a last resort by increasing borrowing against the Council Tax payer which had not been done for a considerable amount of time. The numbers proposed this year were not dissimilar to the figures presented this time last year.

 

·           Were the figures presented in relation to Adult Social Care still uncertain in view of the Adult Social Care  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

70.

Work Programme pdf icon PDF 189 KB

To consider the Committee’s work programme for the remainder of the municipal year

Minutes:

The Committee considered their work programme for the remainder of the municipal year, set out in agenda pages 41 to 42.

 

RESOLVED That:

 

1)     Callum Wernham be thanked for attending the meeting;

 

2)     The work programme for the remainder of the municipal year be noted.