Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

None received.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

That:

Policy and Resources Committee agree to the Corporate Peer Challenge Report.

That public access to the report be immediate.

That public access to the decision be immediate.

The Committee received a report presenting the findings of the Local Government Association (LGA) Corporate Peer Challenge undertaken between 10 and 13 February 2026.

The Chief Executive advised that the Corporate Peer Challenge was a nationally recognized sector-led improvement process. Members were advised that the report reflected the findings of the peer team and could not be amended by the Council. An action plan responding to the recommendations would be developed and presented to a future meeting of the Committee.

Members discussed the composition of the peer review team and the conclusion reached within the report. Concerns were raised regarding the political balance of the peer team and whether some of the observations relating to Local Government Reorganisation and the Local Plan adequately reflected the Council’s position. Reference was also made to the value of member development and pre committee briefings, which had been identified within the report as an area for further consideration.

Other Members welcomed the findings of the review and noted that the report recognized a number of strengths within the Council, including partnership working, communications and organizational stability. The importance of developing a robust action plan to address the recommendations was acknowledged.

Councillor Giles-Medhurst proposed the recommendations in the report and was seconded by Councillor Price.

On being put the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair, the voting being 9 votes For, 5 Against, and 1 Abstention.

RESOLVED:

That:

The Corporate Peer Challenge Report be agreed.

Public access to the report be immediate.

Public access to the decision be immediate.

That:

The Policy & Resources Committee note the contents of this report and agree the following:

Recommendation 1

Agree one of the following 3 options, to confirm how the council should proceed with a HMO Article 4 Direction:

a) Do not progress with making a HMO Article 4 Direction, with officers keeping the situation under review; or

b) Progress with making an immediate HMO Article 4 Direction and grant delegated authority to the Head of Planning Policy & Conservation and the Director of Finance to finalise the Direction Notice and other procedural matters (noting the financial risks set out in paragraph 7.2 and the financial implications report [part ii document]); or

c) Progress with making a non-immediate HMO Article 4 Direction and grant delegated authority to the Head of Planning Policy & Conservation and the Director of Finance to finalise the Direction Notice and other procedural matters.

Then if choosing option b or c:

Recommendation 2

To agree the geographical area to which the Direction would apply (i.e district-wide or a specific area(s) within the district).

The Committee conserved the report regarding the introduction of an Article 4 Direction to remove permitted development rights for the change of use from dwelling houses to Houses in Multiple Occupation.

The Committee received a statement from a member of the public, Chris Jones, in support of an immediate Article 4 Direction, who highlighted concerns regarding the impact of HMOs on neighbouring residents, including antisocial behaviour, parking pressures and the cumulative impact on local communities.

The Head of Planning Policy and Conservation advised that the matter had previously been considered by Members in January 2026 when officers concluded there was insufficient evidence to justify an Article 4 Direction. Since that time there had been a significant increase in known and anticipated HMO activity across the district. With the Council now considering four pending HMO licence applications and being aware of a further six properties likely to submit applications in the near future. Officers therefore considered that there was now sufficient evidence to support the introduction of an Article 4 Directions. Members were advised that a non-immediate Direction would take effect twelve months after being made, during which time consultation would be undertaken before the Direction was confirmed and submitted to the Secretary of State.

Councillor Giles-Medhurst moved, seconded by Councillor Price, that the Committee progress with making a non-immediate district-wide Article 4 Direction and grant delegated authority to the Head of Planning Policy and Conservation and the Director of Finance to finalise the Direction Notice and associated procedural matters.

During the debate, Members acknowledged the concerns expressed by residents regarding the impact of HMOs and recognized that the Council had received an increasing number of complaints relating to HMO developments. Members sought clarification on the reasons why officers now considered an Article 4 Direction to be justified, having previously recommended against one, and officers explained that the increase in known HMO activity since January had significantly strengthened the evidence base.

Members also questioned whether a direction could be applied to a smaller geographical area rather than district-wide and whether this would be more appropriate. Officers advised that an Article 4 Direction could apply to an individual street, provided there was robust evidence to support it, but that the evidence available demonstrated HMO growth across a number of locations within the district and therefore supported a district wide approach. Members also sought clarification on the likelihood of intervention by the Secretary of State and were advised that, whilst any Direction would be subject to review, intervention in relation to HMO Article 4 Directions was uncommon provided there was sufficient supporting evidence.

Councillor Cooper moved an amendment, seconded by Councillor Alley, that the Committee instead progress with an immediate district wide Article 4 direction. A recorded vote having been requested by Councillor Cooper and Councillor Reed had been LOST, the voting being:

For: Councillors Alley, Cooper, Edwards, Fraser and Trivedi (5)

Against: Councillors, Bentley, Cox, Drury, Giles-Medhurst, Khiroya, Lloyd, Price, Rainbow and Sian (9)

Abstentions: Councillor Sims (1).

The substantive motion  ...  view the full minutes text for item PR424

           If the Committee wishes to consider the remaining item in private, it will be appropriate for a resolution to be passed in the following terms:-

            “that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined under paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act. It has been decided by the Council that in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.”

            (Note:  If other confidential business is approved under item 3, it will also be necessary to specify the class of exempt or confidential information in the additional items.)

The Chair moved, duly seconded, the following motion:

“that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined under paragraph (X) of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act. It has been decided by the Council that in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.”