Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr A Parker.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2024 as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2024 were confirmed as a correct record.

To note any declarations of interest made by members in connection with an agenda item. The nature of the interest must also be specified.

Members are asked to discuss any possible interests with Democratic Services prior to the meeting.

There were no Declarations of Interest.

To receive any public participation in accordance with the Council’s public participation scheme.

There was no public participation.

To review the key performance data for Quarter 1 and 2 against the Key Performance Indicators and associated targets for the Corporate Plan.

The Panel reviewed Key Performance Indicator (KPI) data dashboards for quarters 1 and 2 for 2024/25. The Performance and Insight Manager explained the Key Performance Indicators and presented the report.

It was explained that the Performance Indicators had been developed in collaboration with services. The Council’s Executive Management Team reviewed all targets, and the report was the first performance report under the new Corporate Plan, and in line with the new performance management framework.

The report covered all portfolios, though the Panel’s relevant performance measures were numbered 16 – 33 in the dashboard, with the covering report summarising salient points.

The main points raised by the Performance and Insight Manager were as follows: 

·       On the structure and form of the new dashboards, there were 48 KPIs that had been organised by Corporate Plan theme and by Corporate Plan priority. 

·       Good practice and/or good performance is typically presented by an increasing or decreasing value. 

·       The return format shows the unit of the value being reported and the frequency shows how often the KPI is to be reported.

·       In Q1, for Place and Sustainability, 12 measures were available out of a total of 18 and reference was given to planning measures which performed well. Although minor and major application determining times were listed as amber, it was explained that Council’s targets were set much higher than the Government prescribed targets.  

·       The total outstanding net dwelling supply was forecasted to fall short of the targets however remedial action is sought via the Delivery Action Plan.

·       It was thought that the significant increase in household waste being sent to recycling was due to the introduction of the wheeled bins.

·       Concerning water bottle filling stations, cooler weather over the Spring and Summer periods meant lower visitor numbers utilising the stations. 

·       There had to be a balance between residential and commercial space. The conversion of former office space to residential space in the district had countered the development of industrial employment land being developed over this period.

·       On Q2, 27 of the KPIs were available out of 48 and the Council were able to reflect back using the Q1 position. 9 Place and Sustainability measures were available for Q2 with planning measures continuing to perform well. 

·       The planning major application determination time was below the Council’s target however the Council’s target was 25 percentage points higher than the Government’s prescribed target.

·       2 of the Council’s 15 appeals were approved, with 13 being dismissed, and these small numbers did tend to give a large variance against the target.

·       The Garden Waste service continued to perform well.

·       Fly-tipping remained ‘green’ rated.

Overall, the Performance Management Framework provided a sense-check against all of the Council’s priorities in a measurable way.

A member of the Panel asked why fly-tipping incidents were shown as divided by the population of the Forest. Some members questioned whether fly-tipping incidents were even made by residents of the District and, given the unique nature of the New Forest, wondered why the comparable, by-resident metric, was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

An opportunity for the Portfolio Holder’s to provide an update to the Panel on developments within their portfolio.

The Panel received an update on developments within the Planning and Economy Portfolio.

Cllr Geoff Blunden – Environment and Sustainability

It was noted that Cllr Blunden gave his apologies for the meeting.

Cllr Derek Tipp – Planning and Economy

The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Economy provided an update. The main points were as follows:

·       The Local Plan call for sites closed on 13^th December 2024 at which point there had been 150 submissions, ready for review by the Council. More sites were expected to come forward in the coming weeks, however it was explained that the Council were unlikely to be able to meet their housing need as calculated by the Government’s formula despite the 150 site submissions.

·       Following this, the Council’s next step in the Local Plan process would be preparing the Issues and Scope document which is due to be considered at the February Cabinet meeting where approval will be sought to consult with the wider stakeholders through February and March.

·       BCP Council’s Local Plan examination starts on 21^st January, and it was noted that they also faced challenges to meet their housing provision.

·       The Hampshire County Council Mineral Waste plan will go to public examination on the 4^th February. The Portfolio Holder reminded the Panel that this plan had also been considered by the Panel at a previous meeting.

·       The Portfolio Holder explained that he had written a letter to the Secretary of State for Housing at the beginning of the year, expressing his serious concerns about the revised National Planning Policy Framework. This was due to the high level of constraints on development and what impact this would have for the Council on them achieving their housing targets in the Plan Area. No response had been received so far.

·       On the Shared Prosperity Fund, last year’s total was £1.5m and the projects for that pot of money were nearing completion.

·       For 2024/2025 10 case studies for projects had been uploaded to the UK Shared Prosperity Fund and Rural England Prosperity Fund website.

·       For 2025-2026 the Council had been awarded £327,146 allocation of funding for these funds.

·       Recruitment was taking place for a new Economy development manager and Officer. The Portfolio Holder reported that there had been a pleasing number of applications for the roles and the recruitment process would be finalised in the coming days.

·       On building control, there was currently an audit by the building safety regulator taking place which was a standard process across the country following the Grenfell Tower tragedy.

·       It was explained that the Community Infrastructure Levy fund pot stood at £1m. This money would be used for capital funding of local projects. The Panel heard that 77 bids had been received in total and that if all of these bids were approved, their total costs would be around £3m. This demonstrated the popularity of the fund and, in order to decide which projects would receive an allocation, it was explained that a Council Task and Finish Group  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

To agree the work programme to guide the Panel’s activities over the coming months.

A member of the Panel asked whether the subject of water supply fell within the Panel’s remit. The Strategic Director of Place, Operations and Sustainability explained that the Council’s emergency response operation sat within the remit of the Housing and Communities panel whereas infrastructure and capacity of electricity/water supply may be something that the Place and Sustainability Panel could consider in the future. It was noted that this topic would be added to the Work Programme for scoping and future consideration.

RESOLVED:

That the Work Programme be approved.