Delegated Decisions by a Delegated Officer or a single Cabinet Member
Procedural Guidance:
1. The standard DD checklist and template report should be completed for any delegated
decision to be made by either (a) an individual Cabinet member or (b) a Delegated Officer
(‘the Decision-Maker’). Only some categories of minor officer decisions have been
specifically exempted from these requirements - the Head of Corporate Law can advise
further on such exemptions and also the procedure in cases of extreme urgency.
2. The Reporting Officer should prepare (and sign) the report and the checklist. The report
should also be signed off by a representative of the Director of Finance and Resources.
Once the Decision-Maker has made the decision, and ‘signed off’ the report, a copy of both
completed documents should be sent electronically to the Head of Democratic Services. If
he is satisfied that proper process has been followed, he will immediately arrange publication
of the decision (and the report) on the Council’s Corporate Management Information System
‘CMIS’). He will notify both the Reporting Officer and the Decision-Maker when this has been
done.
3. If the decision is made by a Delegated Officer, and is not a ‘key decision’, it can be acted
upon as soon as notification is received that it has been published on CMIS.
4. Other decisions will be subject to possible call-in. The Head of Democratic Services will
notify all Council members of the decision at the same time as it is published on CMIS. If no
call-in request is made within 7 days, the decision can then be acted on.
5. If any proposed decision is a ‘key decision’, then a copy of the report and any
background papers must also be made available for public inspection (and sent to the
relevant scrutiny committee chair) at least 5 clear days before the decision is made. In such
a case, the Reporting Officer should send the completed report and checklist to the Head of
Democratic Services far enough ahead of the decision being made for him to arrange this.
He will then advise the Reporting Officer when the 5 day period has elapsed.
6. A ‘key decision’ means any executive decision which is likely to (a) result in the Council
incurring expenditure, or making savings, which are significant having regard to the budget
for the relevant function or (b) have a significant effect on communities living or working in
two or more wards in the city. Revenue expenditure of less than £250k or capital
expenditure of less than £1m will not normally be considered significant in this context.
Further advice in any particular case can be sought from the Head of Corporate Law or Head
of Democratic Services.
7. If a report is marked ‘Not for Publication’ because it contains exempt or confidential
information, an abridged version of the decision and report will be prepared by the Head of
Democratic Services to ensure such information is not made public. He may well liaise with
the Reporting Officer to ensure such information is correctly identified.
8. A delegated decision by an individual Cabinet member can only be made by a Cabinet
Member, and not by a Deputy Cabinet member.
The checklist starts on the next page:
Checklist for Delegated Decision by either individual Cabinet Member or Delegated
Officer
Reporting Officer
Harvey Emms
Tel. No.
X 26036
Directorate
E&R
E-mail
[email protected]
Directorate Ref.
Summary of Consultation
DD Ref.
Responses to Article 4
Direction to remove permitted
development rights for
Houses in Multiple
Occupation in parts of St
Gabriel’s Consultation
Name of
Henri Murison
Authorising Officer
Tel.No.
0191 2289251
Directorate
E-mail
[email protected]
Name of Decision
Maker
Henri Murison
Tel. No.
0191 2289251
Position of
Decision-Maker
Cabinet Portfolio Holder
Quality of Place
E-mail
[email protected]
Checklist
Complete Further Information
[ Yes, No,
N/A ]
1. Is the DD Report complete and attached and
signed by the Decision-Maker?
Yes
2. Is the decision a Key Decision?
No
3. If a Key Decision, is it on the Forward Plan?
N/A
4. If a Key Decision, was the report published for
at least 5 clear days before the decision was
made?
N/A
5. Has there been member consultation? (Enter
details in section 6 of the attached report).
Yes
6. Is a Project Appraisal Form required and
completed? If so please attach. (Required for all
capital expenditure).
No
7. I confirm financial advice has been sought (state
officer) and section 4.2 of the attached report
has been completed.
Yes
8. The following financial issues have been
Karen Brown
considered:
8.1. A funding source been identified and
secured.
N/A
8.2. There is written confirmation of funding.
N/A
8.3. The conditions of funding have been
identified (State what is being put in place
to ensure conditions of funding can be
met).
N/A
8.4. The risks of not meeting the funding
conditions have been assessed.
N/A
8.5. If a scheme is time limited, has a budget
been identified to pick up any termination
costs e.g. redundancy payments or ongoing lease agreements etc? (If so, state
budget manager and revenue cost
centre).
N/A
8.6. Have the revenue consequences of
capital expenditure been identified and
agreed with the Budget Manager (if so
state, budget manager and revenue cost
centre).
N/A
8.7. A full breakdown of the Revenue and
Capital costs and budget provisions for
this decision, as summarised in section
4.2 of the attached report, are available
(state location of the evidence).
N/A
8.8. Capital Expenditure - has the scheme
been entered onto the capital
programme?
N/A
9. If applicable, have the Council’s procurement
processes been followed, and those of any
relevant funding bodies (if external funding is
involved)?
N/A
10. Have any Tax and VAT implications been
assessed? (If so, state officer and outcome)
N/A
11. Has Corporate or Commercial Law advice been
sought? If so, state officer and ensure section
5.2 of report is completed
Yes
12. Has Organisational Development advice been
sought? If so, state officer and nature of advice
(if not included in report).
N/A
13. Please indicate what legal agreements (if any)
N/A
Tom Sunter
are proposed as a result of this delegated
decision
14. Please indicate if the Decision-Maker, or any
Cabinet Member who has been consulted about
this decision, has declared any personal or
prejudicial interest in it and if so, if any
dispensation has been granted by the standards
committee.
No
15. Is the report marked ‘Not for Publication’? (If so,
please explain why and clarify which parts of it
contain exempt or confidential information)
N/A
Dated ……………………………………
Signed ………………………………………….
Portfolio: Quality of Place
Summary of formal consultation responses to the Article 4 Direction
Notice to remove permitted for Houses in Multiple Occupation in St
Gabriel’s area.
Report by:
Harvey Emms, Director of Housing, Planning and Transport
Report to:
Henri Murison, Cabinet Portfolio Holder, Quality of Life
Ward Implications:
North Heaton
Please indicate
For Decision
1.
Purpose
1.1
Since October 2010 changes to planning legislation now allow Class C3 family
dwelling houses to be changed to the recently established Class C4 known as
Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO), without the need for planning permission,
making such a change “permitted development”. Article 4 Directions can be issued to
remove these permitted development rights and thereby require an application to be
submitted within identified areas. On 20th June 2012 Henri Murison, the Quality of
Life Portfolio Holder agree to proceed with an Article 4 Direction in St Gabriel’s as
illustrated on the plan in Appendix 1. The Council gave notice of its intention to make
an Article 4 Direction on 18th July 2011 and the consultation process ran to the 7th
September 2012.
This report outlines the results from the consultation on the Council’s formal notice of
its intention to bring an Article 4 direction into force in St Gabriel’s from 19 th July
2013. It then seeks formal confirmation of the Article 4. Direction.
2.
Recommendations
2.1
(I) Confirm the Article 4 Direction to come into force on 19th July 2013 in St Gabriel’s,
within the area edged on the plan in Appendix 1.
3.
Background
3.1
Problems caused by high concentrations of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs)
have become an issue in a number of towns and cities across the country. High
concentrations can have a detrimental effect on the local environment as well as
impacts on social cohesion and services within an area.
3.2
Planning permission is generally required for a material change of use of land or
buildings. However the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as
amended ) reduces the burden on the planning system by grouping similar uses
within specific use classes, and changes from one to another do not require planning
permission.
3.3
On 1st October 2010 two changes affecting the planning system’s control of HMOs
became effective as a result of government policy. The first change meant that a
change of use from C3 dwellings to C4 HMOs became permitted development, and
the second change related to the compensation provisions if an authority chose to
pass a Direction removing the new Permitted Development Right. The changes
mean that planning permission is no longer required to convert a dwelling (Class C3)
into a small HMO (Class C4), as planning permission has already been granted by
amending the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order
1995.
3.4
In order to manage the growth and distribution of HMOs, it is proposed that the City
Council regains (in part) its planning control of these permitted changes, as the
Council considers that exceptional circumstances exist, and that failure to introduce
an Article 4 Direction in the St Gabriel’s area will lead to the further loss of family
housing, and have an adverse impact on maintaining sustainable balanced
communities. An Article 4 direction is already in place in the Area of Housing Mix and
a further direction will come into force in High West Jesmond in December 2012.
3.5
An Article 4 Direction does not prevent development but it does require that a
planning application is submitted so that the impact of the proposed development
can be assessed.
3.6
On September 2010 the Council’s Executive agreed to an Article 4 Direction in parts
of the City where family housing is being lost to houses in multiple occupation and
where it is impacting on the character or the area and is detracting from the Council’s
objective of creating sustainable communities.
3.7
The Council gave notice of its intention to make its first Article 4 Direction in relation
to this matter on 24th November 2010, to come into force for the Area of Housing Mix
on 25th November 2011. The Council complied with the statutory consultation
process and as such there are no further publicity requirements for the Council to
comply with prior to the Article 4 direction coming into force.
3.8
Three additional areas High West Jesmond, St Gabriels and Arthur’s Hill were
identified through the first Article 4 Direction consultation process and the
development of heat maps highlighting potential pressure points. In November 2011
officer were authorised to consult with residents with in each area to establish
support for the introduction of a Article 4 Direction and implement the Directive were
appropriate. High West Jesmond completed the process earlier this year with the
new order coming into force on 9th December 2012. Informal consultation has been
undertaken with residents and stakeholders within the St Gabriel’s area in February
and March 2012 with only one objection being received from the National Landlords
Association. Discussions are now underway with local Councillors in the Wingrove
and Elswick Wards on the proposed boundaries for informal consultation with
residents and stakeholders in the Arthur’s Hill area.
4.0
Proposals and Reasons
4.1
As a result of the informal consultation outlined above in section 3.8, on the 20th June
2012 Cllr Henri Murison agreed to authorise the making of an Article 4 Direction to
control changes of use from C3 to C4 in the St Gabriel’s area identified on the map in
Appendix 1 following the 12 month notice period.
Reasons for Recommendations
4.2
The September 2010 Executive report at paragraph 5.7 identified concerns regarding
HMOs and shared housing as demonstrated by the Shared Housing SPD evidence
base. The Council considers that very exceptional circumstances exist and that
failure to introduce an Article 4 Direction in St Gabriel’s will lead to the loss of family
housing. Having considered the responses to the consultations it is considered
expedient to confirm the Article 4 Direction.
Other Options considered when making recommendations
Do Nothing: To maintain the status quo. This is not a realistic option given the
reasons outlined in section 4.2 and the overwhelming level of public support in favour
of an Article 4 Direction in St Gabriel’s.
4.3
Financial Summary:
Monitoring and enforcement will be implemented within existing resources and
capacity with no additional impact on revenue or capital budgets
£
Budget provision
x
Expenditure Narrative (insert additional lines and total)
x
For Capital decisions provide a concise narrative with costs and budget provision relating to
this decision.
Capital Budget
x
Capital Expenditure Narrative (insert additional lines and total)
x
Revenue Implications: year 1
x
Revenue Implications: year 2
x
Revenue Implications: year 3
x
5.
Resource, Legal and Other Considerations
5.1
Views of the Director of Finance and Resources
The Director of Finance and Resources notes the content of the report. Any
additional income and/or associated costs must be managed within existing
resources. There are no further comments.
5.2
Views of the Chief legal Officer
The comments of the Chief Legal Officer have been incorporated into the report.
5.3
Other Considerations
The Annex to this report sets out any other significant corporate considerations or
potential implications of the recommendations being agreed (or not agreed) which it
is felt important the decision-maker should take into account.
6.
Consultation
6.1
The Council gave notice of its intention to make an Article 4 Direction on 18th July
and the consultation process ran up to 7th September 2012. The consultation on the
Direction was advertised in the Journal on 18th July 2011, on the Council’s website
and individual consultation letters were sent to residents, groups and organisations
who are active in the proposed Direction area. This included residents and landlord
groups.
Summary of Consultation
6.2
The informal consultation held in February/March resulted in 10 representations and
2 petitions being received supporting the introduction of an Article 4 Direction with
only one objection being received from the National Landlords Association.
6.3
The formal consultation ran from 18th July to 7th September with only three responses
being received, two in support of proposal and one objection from the National
Landlords Association.
6.4
The National Landlords Association objection was to reiterate the objections
submitted for the High West Jesmond Direction. Their objection states that the
introduction of the Use Class C4, in relation to HMO accommodation, was
unnecessary and served only to create greater confusion and bureaucracy for the
private-rented sector. This is not the case as the Direction removes deemed consent
requiring owners to submit a planning application under the same procedures as for
other domestic property alterations requiring planning permission.
6.5
A full summary of the representations can be found in Appendix 2
7.
What happens next
7.1
The Direction will come into force on 19th July 2013. Once confirmed the Direction is
permanent (unless cancelled by the local authority or Secretary of State). This will
mean that after 19th July 2013 planning permission will be required to change the use
of a property from a C3 family dwelling to a C4 house in multiple occupation
7.2
As soon as reasonably practicable after the Direction has been confirmed the
Council will serve notice locally and notify the Secretary of State.
8.
Contact Officers and Background Papers
8.1
Colin White
Senior Housing Renewal Officer
[email protected]
Ex 27839
Annex to Report - Any other significant corporate considerations
(a) Risk Management
Any Key Risks
Mitigating Actions
Conversions from family dwellings City Council unable to pay the compensation
to small HMOs. Proposed approach costs associated with introducing the Article
will mean that for the first 12 months
4 Direction immediately.
following the introduction of
legislation properties can convert
from family dwellings to small HMOs
without the need for planning
permission. Planning applications
that have been refused for C4 uses
could also be implemented. This
could have a significant impact on the
character of areas prior to the
implementation of the Article 4
Direction.
Judicial Review: Any decision of the
Secretary of State could be the
subject of judicial review
proceedings. The Council would be
an interested party in such
proceedings, which would increase
the Council’s costs. There is the risk
that any such application would
lengthen the timescales involved with
the proposal.
Beyond the City Council control.
(b) Equality
This report deals with a change to the Use Classes Order. Previous iterations of the
CLG consultation dealt with equalities. As the Council is now amending the planning
policy framework, the change has been subject to an Equalities Impact and Needs
Assessment (EINA).
(c) Environmental and Sustainability
There are no significant or direct implications for the Council’s strategic objectives to
promote an awareness of and commitment to environmental sustainability, although
the responses are generally supportive of achieving balanced and thus sustainable
communities across the City.
(d) Partnership
This report does not propose the creation of a new partnership.
(e) Community Safety
There are community safety issues linked to HMOs. The change to planning
legislation could help us meet the following Sustainable Community Strategy themes
by giving the Council more control over the concentrations of HMOs:

Wellbeing, health and independence

Safe, inclusive, cohesive and empowered communities
(f) Any Other Significant Considerations or Implications
None
Authorisation Checklist
Role
Name
Date
Reporting officer*
Director of Finance &
Resources
Representative
I confirm my agreement to the
recommendations set out in paragraph 2 of
this report for the reasons explained in the
report.
Decision-Maker
Now please send to the Head of Democratic Services the following:1 – completed checklist
2 – completed report
3 – proof of the relevant authorisations by Finance representative and the Decision
Maker(Audit have indicated that authorisation by e-mail is acceptable, but please send
copies of the relevant e-mails with the checklist and report)
* It is the Reporting Officer’s responsibility to retain an audit trail that everything recorded on
the checklist and report is accurate.
M:\SRO\Reports\Template Reports\DO & Single Member DD guidance checklist & template report July 2011
SRO amends.doc
Appendix 1 - St Gabriel’s Article 4 Direction Area
Appendix 2: Detailed Results of St Gabriel’s Consultation
Respondent
Support / Object
/ Support and
suggest change
/ Suggest
change
Comment
NCC Response
Stella Willmott
& Graham
Woodford
Support
Support the proposals and proposed boundary
Support noted.
Teresa
Strachan
Support
Supports the proposals
Support noted.
NLA
Object
Consider that the introduction of the Use Class C4, in
relation to HMO accommodation, was unnecessary and
served only to create greater confusion and bureaucracy
for the private-rented sector. The NLA does not believe
there is sufficient justification put forward by Newcastle
City Council for introducing further demarcation into
existing stock for the purpose of controlling the legitimate
use of property. The NLA support the use of alternative
options for tackling Anti Social Behaviour.
An Article 4 Direction does not prevent
development but it does require that a
planning application is submitted so that
the impact can be assessed. Each planning
application submitted will be determined on
its own merits.