Agenda item

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW

(Papers relied on to write the report, which do not contain exempt information and which are not published elsewhere)

Cllr T Adams – Council Leader introduced the report and stated that pressure had continued on affordable housing in a difficult landscape with approximately sixty-five people in temporary accommodation due to increased levels of homelessness. He added that the Invest North Norfolk initiative had been launch and the Council had received a good level of contact on grants, whilst the Cedars building had sixty percent tenancy agreed in principle with further solid interest. It was noted that further capital investment had been made to support businesses and to meet net zero goals, whilst customer contact had also increased significantly. Cllr T Adams informed Members that works on the solar project at the Reef had been completed and was performing exceptionally well, whilst leisure centres continued to exceed expectations in terms of use and membership. He added that thanks should be given to the RNLI and lifeguards for all their work throughout a busy summer, and that public convenience works had finished in Fakenham, with attention now turning to Holt. It was noted that Council Tax collection remained strong and showed exemplary performance from the Team.

Questions and Discussion

       i.          Cllr V Holliday referred to housing and suggested that this could be a topic for investigation with issues such as the loss of private rentals, and asked whether the Council could take any steps to address this. She added that delivery of affordable housing was also difficult, with over one hundred planning applications waiting, and asked whether any affordable housing applications could be given priority, once nutrient neutrality issues had been resolved. Cllr T Adams stated that there were a number of factors influencing homelessness and the Council was doing what it could to help those in situations of domestic violence, family breakdown, and other issues causing homelessness. He added that thought did need to be given to prioritisation of planning applications once nutrient neutrality restrictions had been resolved, but it was not a conversation that he’d been involved in. It was noted that there were also businesses struggling with delays to development, and there had to be a balance to the consideration of applications. The ADP stated that conversations on clearing the backlog of planning applications had begun, with recent news suggesting that the Government may try to reverse nutrient neutrality legislation. He added that the Council had in excess of one-hundred applications in its backlog, and clearing these would be a significant challenge. It was noted that whilst affordable housing was a relevant consideration, it was not the only one, and the process had to be dealt with in a fair manner. Cllr W Fredericks stated that work had begun with an independent consultant to determine how to deliver affordable homes faster, but it was a complex subject and would be discussed as part of the Corporate Plan workshop sessions. She added that not all affordable housing was delivered separately from market value housing, and developers often had to deliver market value housing to make affordable housing viable.

      ii.          Cllr V Holliday referred to customer service and noted that whilst call numbers were fairly stable, call times had reduced significantly, and asked if there was an explanation for this. Cllr L Withington replied that calls were highly dependent on the time of year and corresponding issues, with April seeing a high number of calls for garden bin renewals. She added that it could be that officers were better able to respond to certain queries, and that calls were also now being categorised into level one and level two, with different call handlers for different queries. It was noted that efforts were being made to make more information available online, and that the chatbot service had also gone live to help people self-serve using the NNDC Website. Cllr V Holliday suggested that it may be related to the complexity of questions, but she accepted that this could vary according to the time of year. Cllr L Withington noted that some queries led to further enquiries and this could increase call length to avoid creating additional work for back office staff.

     iii.          Cllr N Housden stated that overall the report seemed to suggest possible issues with under-resourcing and asked if there were issues throughout the organisation with staff shortages. Cllr T Adams replied that capacity was a concern as a result of vacancies and staff absences, with some areas particularly difficult to recruit to, though matters had moved on since publication of the report and this should be taken into account. The CE stated that there were no significant issues in terms of staff vacancies, and it had been highlighted at a recent JSCC meeting that the Council was not an outlier in terms of staff turnover and speed of recruitment. He added that the Council had to operate within a set budget, and this had to be taken into account alongside increases in demand for services. Cllr N Housden stated that the Council was moving into a difficult time, and had to consider strategy and staffing for the future, as it would only get more difficult to recruit.

    iv.          Cllr C Cushing referred to the Fakenham roundabout project and asked if officers had a view on how the project would progress alongside the Fakenham urban extension, if nutrient neutrality legislation was lifted. The DFPCC stated that the Council would have to wait until legislation had been passed before the urban extension and related roundabout could be significantly progressed, but the developer had expressed confidence that they could deliver the project once this had taken place. He added that in the meantime he would seek to ensure that any grants required were carried onto into the next year to ensure that the project could be delivered by autumn 2024.

      v.          Cllr N Housden asked whether there was any scope to give priority to section 106 applications once nutrient neutrality legislation had been lifted. The DFPCC replied that there were applications currently being considered that should be determined well in advance of legislative changes, and it was unlikely that any prioritisation would be required. He added that his main priority was to ensure that funding was available for projects such as the Fakenham roundabout. The ADP stated that there were a number of applications held up in the S106 stage that had been through the Committee process and were awaiting signature, and these should be relatively easy to recommence, but checks would need to be made to ensure that they remained viable.

     vi.          The recommendation was proposed by Cllr S Penfold and second by Cllr R Macdonald.

RESOLVED

1.     That the Overview & Scrutiny Committee consider and comment upon issues within the report for subsequent consideration by Cabinet.