REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER (PLANNING AND STRATEGIC SERVICES) AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER MAJOR APPLICATIONS IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Transcription

1 REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER (PLANNING AND STRATEGIC SERVICES) AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER MAJOR APPLICATIONS IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1. Summary of Report 1.1 The aim is to improve the performance of 109a applications, whilst maintaining the improvement in performance of BVPI 109b and 109c (minor and other applications). 1.2 The Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have set the Council a target to determine 60% of major planning applications within 13 weeks for 2007/2008. However, it is considered more realistic, given the need to fill existing gaps within the establishment, to aim to meet the target by March 2008 to allow an improvement plan to be drawn up, considered and implemented. 1.3 This report sets out the background, identifies the main issues that have impacted on performance in the past and sets out recommendations to address performance. 2. Recommendations 2.1 The main recommendations are set out in the following improvement plan: 1. To fill the newly authorised Principal Development Control Officer (Major Projects) post as soon as possible, with one of the main roles of this post to take responsibility for the dealing with major applications and to assist/mentor others in that process. 2. Increased emphasis be placed on the provision of meaningful and informed pre-application discussions/negotiation on major applications and the new approach be communicated to regular planning agents. 3. When major planning applications are submitted without preapplication discussions, then they will be determined as submitted against extant planning policies within the 13 weeks deadline. The new approach will be communicated to regular planning agents. 4. The support team, who validate all planning applications, must seek authorisation from the planning case officer before any major planning is validated. 5. The Development Control Manager will produce a policy guidance note (to be adopted as SPD in the future) on information required as part of the validation process. Such applications submitted without the required information will not be validated. 6. Consultation bodies will be given one further opportunity to reply and if not the application will be determined without their comments. 7. Applicants will be encouraged to submit the heads of terms in respect of Section 106 Agreements with the submission of the planning application. 8. Establish a development team approach where the case officer coordinates a monthly meeting of the associated bodies to consider new major planning application proposals and pre-application proposals. 9. Explore improved performance monitoring, particularly for major applications in consultation with the Portfolio Manager (Planning and Strategic Services).

2 10. The Development Control Manager to liaise with the Head of Legal Services, in consultation with the Portfolio Manager (Planning and Strategic Services), to further explore the possibility of a standardised (template) Section 106 Agreement/clauses that can be used for major planning applications that raise similar issues. 11. Monitor performance against BV109a and evaluate impact of measures within the Improvement Plan. Review the success of the Improvement Plan 6 months after the recruitment of the relevant replacement staff. 12. Work with the Planning Advisory Service who have agreed to support the Council s Development Control Service in respect of: - Support, mentoring and training for staff in handling major applications Help to develop guidance for applicants in preparing S106 Agreements Provide support in developing existing improvement strategy to sustain performance on minor and other applications Arrange training on project management skills 3. Background Information Context 3.1 In August 2004, the Chief Executive resolved to ask the Deputy Chief Executive and Head of Development and Building Control Service to: Work together to urgently carry out a fundamental and thorough review of the practices and procedures in the Development and Building Control Service Unit using best practice techniques from other authorities with a view to an early report with appropriate recommendations to cover staffing issues, performance targets, practice and procedures, delegation and all other matters relevant to producing an improved service that will meet the statutory targets for performance. These targets are: BVPI 109a (major applications) 60% in 13 weeks* BVPI 109b (minor applications) 65% in 8 weeks BVPI 109c (minor applications) 80% in 8 weeks (* 16 weeks for applications with an Environmental Impact Assessment.) (NB 109a (major applications) consist of applications for 10 or more dwellings or site area of more than 0.5 ha / the creation of over1,000 sq.m. of commercial floor area or site area of more than 1 ha.) 3.2 This resulted in the Review of Development Control Speed and Quality Report which was approved in March The report examined all aspects of the service in order to make recommendations on how the speed of determining planing applications could be improved. The aim was to exceed the targets set by the ODPM and to achieve top quartile performance through 49 recommendations. 3.3 However, the emphasis of the report was on BVPI 109b and 109c. The reason for this was that major planning applications, which are relatively few in number can generate unique issues and problems and are thus not a particularly good indicator of the overall performance of development Control. It was also considered that improvements in the performance of BVPI 109b and 109c would inevitably lead to an improved performance in BVPI 109a.

3 The main improvements that have been implemented from the original Improvement Plan are as follows: - Establishing the post of the Principal Planning Officer (Special Projects). - Setting up the Planning Support Team. - Amending the Scheme of Delegation. - Changes in terms of Committee Site Visits. - Establish an agents forum. Improvements that are yet to be implemented from Phase are: - - Preparation of a procedures manual. - All consultations to be sent out within 3 days of receipt of planning application (the present average being just over 4 days). - An extensive range of leaflets to advice applicants/agents. 3.4 The vast majority of the recommendations contained in the Review have now been implemented and this has resulted in a marked improvement in the performance of BVPI 109b and c (see Appendix 2 and 3). The target as noted in para 1.1 above was achieved in the first quarter of 2006/7 and has been close to target in the subsequent quarters. However, the associated improvement in 109a has not been forthcoming, and the performance for this category has fallen. 3.5 As a result phase 2 of Development and Building Control Review approved by Regulatory Committee at the end of November requested the Portfolio Manager (Planning and Strategic Services) and the Development Control manager to prepare an improvement Plan to improve the performance of BVPI 109a and maintain the improvement in performance of BVPI 109b and 109c. In that report it was noted that the Department of Communities and Local Government have set the Council a target to determine 60% of major planning applications within 13 weeks for 2007/2008. However, the report concluded that it would be more realistic to aim to meet the target by March 2008 to allow an improvement plan to be drawn up, considered and implemented. Issues 3.6 Over the last 5 years, the performance for BVPI 109a has varied considerably, with the average being generally between 50% and 60%. However performance has reduced considerably in the last 2 years, there has been a marked decline in performance, with the average being 52% (January 2005 December 2006). It is therefore relevant to analyse why there has been a marked decline in performance in 109a. 3.7 It is some 2 years since the initial Review of Development Control, with its marked emphasis on performance of BVPI 109b and 109c. The relevant staff have worked hard to achieve the targets set for them in respect of these key indicators. However, it is considered that some of this achievement has been at the expense of performance for 109a. Type of applications 3.8 Over the last 18months there has been a marked change in the number and type of major planning applications received. There have been a high number of particularly large and complex planning applications which have been submitted, eg 05/00140 Landywood (1000 dwellings)

4 05/00400 Landywood phase 1 (370 dwellings) 05/ Brinsford Park and Ride. 05/00938 Campions Wood, Cheslyn Hay (560 dwellings) 06/ Featherstone MDA (mixed use development including 1000 dwellings) 06/00638 Brookhouse Lane, Featherstone (360 dwellings) 3.9 The type of applications identified above involve a unique set of issues and problems, which have to be investigated, considered, balanced and judged against all the priorities of the Council in terms of its aims and objectives. These 6 applications alone represent 12.5% (6/48) of the major applications received in the last 2 years. It is acknowledged that it would be extremely difficult to deal with this type of application within 13 weeks under any circumstances. General Workloads 3.10 The planning applications listed have all resulted in appeals, which have had serious implications on the work loads within Development Control generally. This has had particular implications for the more experienced officers in particular. Traditionally the section has had 1 Head of Service and 2 Principal Development Control Officers (PDCOs), ie 3 principal/experienced officers. The other Development Control Officers (DCOs) have recently been relatively inexperienced, and this has also impacted on the available time of the more senior officers because of the need to coach and provide advice. Pre-application advice 3.11 Not all applications are the subject of pre-application advice. If there has been no pre-application contact, then it has been the case that the time period for processing major applications has been extended as a result because of the work that has been needed to amend these applications. It has also been difficult for officers to find the capacity/resources to carry out meaningful pre-application discussions, when their available time is limited, there has been a lack of experienced development control officers. The priority has clearly been to deal with the live applications. Validation 3.12 Validation is carried out by the Support Team. There are a number of instances where post validation, the case officer has required further information in order to fully consider the application, and this has resulted in delays in processing the application. Section 106 Agreements 3.13 More routinely Section 106 Agreements are required with major application, eg educational contributions, off-site highway works and contributions to Public Open Space. At present, these are not addressed/processed until such time as the application has been considered and determined. Any applications which are subject to Section 106 Agreements inevitably extend beyond the 13/16 week time period

5 Consultation Responses 3.14 Another major factor in dealing with major applications is the responses from external consultees eg Parish Council, County Highway, Highways Agency, etc, and internal consultees eg Environmental Health, Landscape. A delayed response from one of these bodies can delay dealing with an application significantly. Performance monitoring 3.15 At present performance monitoring is done on a weekly basis, with the Development Control Manager running off a list of all outstanding applications for each officer, followed by meeting with both area teams to discuss progress and any issues. In addition the DCM also checks the present level of performance for that quarter this information is displayed on a chart within the office. Capacity 3.16 There have been unique staffing issues over the last 12 months. The third Principal Planning Officer (Special Projects) post was not fully effective until October 2005, when a replacement Principal Planning Officer was appointed for the southern area team. More recently, since January 2006, with the absence of the Head of Service and other staff covering his duties and responsibilities, this again has had a direct impact on the workloads and capacity of the 3 principal officers. This has resulted in particular issues in respect of 109a application, as the Principal Planning Officers are the main lead officers on major applications, due to their experience, qualifications and capability for dealing with the major/complex applications. Main Proposals Principal Development Control Officer (Major Projects) The Phase 2 Review report noted that the combination of the need to identify resources to implement the Major Applications Improvement Plan (MAIP), the imminent retirement of the previous post holder and the need to improve coordination between the Development Plans Service and Development Control led to the conclusion that the post of Principal Planning Officer (Special Projects) be changed It was suggested that there is a need to focus on major planning applications, to work on Development Control aspects of the LDF and to work with the Development Control Manager on longer term projects. However one of the main roles of this post would be to deal with major applications and to assist/mentor other officers in that process The creation of this post was agreed at the Regulatory Committee in November 2006, and the Job Description has been changed and the post has now been advertised. The time scale for recruitment for this post is to interview at the beginning of February 2007, with a potential start date of April This will provide capacity at Principal Officer level focussed on dealing with major planning applications.

6 Pre-application advice It is acknowledged that time spent in pre-application discussions/negotiation is a large factor in the time period for dealing with applications. However, in order to be beneficial to the applicant, then those discussions/negotiations have to be meaningful and helpful. Applicants/agents should be advised that major applications will be determined as submitted, against extant policy advice and all other material considerations, without negotiation of amendments Raising the profile and importance of Pre-application discussions in this way means that the right level of officer with the correct expertise and knowledge has to be available to carry out those pre-application inquiries. This means that the officer must identify the issues associated with any proposal and involve the right other bodies at this stage in meaningful input. The creation of the post noted above will help to contribute to this process, but it should be noted that there is still a relatively shortage of resources/ capacity within the section for this type of work. Validation 3.22 In order to improve performance it is necessary to ensure that all the information required to deal with the application is provided before the application is validated. Having to later request information and deal with it adds substantially to the process. There is, therefore, a need for a substantially improved advice in terms of information required to validate an application (this applies not only to majors but also to minor and other planning applications) It is suggested that the Development Control Manager prepare an improved guidance note on the information required before an application is validated. Provided this information is provided/available to potential applicants/agents, then I consider that it should form part of the Council s policy and we will be justified in not validating an application until the relevant information has been provided It is also suggested that applications for major or minor developments should be allocated to a case officer and checked by that officer for completeness, before the application is validated. Whilst this will extend the validation process, I consider that it is more likely to identify any additional information required at an early stage and thus reduce the overall time period for dealing with the applications. Consultation Responses 3.25 There is clearly an onus on the consultee to provide a substantive response within 21 days of the consultation. Most of the bodies consulted are generally good at responding within this time period, but there are others who are not It is suggested that all consultations are reminded that they are required to provide a substantive response within 21 days. Where a consultee has not responded within the relevant time period and the officer feels that a consultation response is required then the case officer will contact the relevant body by or letter allowing a further 14 days, but noting that if a

7 response is not provided within that period then the application will be determined on the basis of the advice and responses received at that time. S106 Agreements 3.27 As noted above the majority of major applications are subject to section 106 Agreements. This inevitably extends the time period past the 13/16 week time period for determination. However pre-application discussions should identify when and what Section 106 Agreement s will be required for a particular application, and this should form part of the submitted application. Applicants will be encouraged to submit the heads of terms or draft Section 106 Agreements with the submission of planning applications There is the possibility of charging for such advice in order to off set the costs of providing this service, and this should be explored further It is suggested that we further explore the production of a standardised Section 106 Agreement is produced, where the relevant information can be slotted in, and this should be available both in written form and on the Council s web site, in order to encourage early provision of a draft Agreement. The Head of Legal Services and the Portfolio Manager (Planning and Strategic Services) will be involved in this process. Team development approach In order to identify issues and potential problems to dealing with applications in a timely manner, the authority should adopt a team development approach. In dealing with potential issues on an application, this may result in alternative factors being brought to the fore eg the provision of a visibility splay requiring the removal of an important frontage hedge It is suggested that this approach would involve all relevant bodies which have an interest in such applications to get together at an early stage and to discuss any relevant issues and alternative solutions. This would involve monthly meetings of the main bodies which input into major applications eg Landscape Officer, Environmental Health Officer, Conservation Officer, County Highways, Highways Agency, Environment Agency, etc. Performance Monitoring 3.32 It is suggested that there is further scope to explore further aspects of performance monitoring. Whilst the present arrangement appears to work reasonably well there may be scope to provide further information to assist officers or make performance information more readily available. It is suggested that the DCM, together with the GIS supervisor examine the further potential of the uniform computer system. The DCM will also consider and discuss potential improvements in the performance monitoring with the Portfolio Manager (Planning and Strategic Services). Planning Advisory Service (PAS) 3.33 PAS commissioned a report to identify areas where improvements were necessary in the Council s Development Control Service to enable the Council to rise above the position of being a Standards Authority and sustain

8 the necessary improvement in performance. The Addison Report identified the following areas where the Council needed support: - 1) Provision of an experienced development control officer to support, mentor and train existing junior staff in the handling of major applications. 2) Support in developing guidance for applications on the requirements for section106 agreements and validation requirements. 3) Provide support in developing the existing improvement strategy to sustain performance on minor and other applications and identify actions required to improve performance on major applications with clear timescales and resources identified. 4) Arrange training on project management skills and support in setting up project planning tools to improve the management of major applications. 5) Assist with the preparation of a development control procedures manual for officers and members PAS have confirmed that they are in a position to offer support to the Development Control Service in areas 1) - 4) above. Capacity 3.33 The majority of the suggestions made above will result increased workloads for the PDCO and DCM given the current staffing situation. There are currently 4 vacancies in the DC establishment and it is anticipated that appointments will be made within the next few weeks and new staff will be in post by April. It is only then that the recommended improvements can be fully tested in order to evaluate their success in achieving improved performance. It is therefore recommended that the impact of the 11 improvements set out in para 2.1 is monitored and evaluated. A 6 month Review of this Phase 2 Improvement Plan will then be reported to Members (ie. autumn 2007). 4. Alternative Options Considered 4.1 To continue as at present would mean that we would not be seen to trying to improve performance in respect of major applications. In view of the current circumstances, I do not consider this is a viable option. 5. Reasons for Decision 5.1 It is considered that the plan outlined above offers a sound base to improve performance. 5.2 The proposal supports and furthers the aims and objectives of the Council s Corporate Strategy, 6. Links to Corporate Aims and Objectives 6.1 Aim 1 to be a Council which celebrates and improves South Staffordshire s distinctive environment. Aim 5 to be a well managed Council and community leader. 7. Scrutiny Powers. 7.1 Not applicable 8. Financial Implications

9 8.1 There are no direct expenditure implications arising from the current proposals. 9. Legal Powers for Proposed Action 9.1 Part III of the Town and Country Planning Act. 10. Crime and Disorder Implications 10.1 Unless otherwise stated, all maters reported are not considered to have any adverse impact on the Crime and Disorder Act. All matters have been considered in relation thereto. 11. Equal Opportunities Implications 11.1 Unless otherwise stated, all maters reported are not considered to have any adverse impact on the Equal Opportunities Act. All matters have been considered in relation thereto. 12. Risk Assessment 11.2 All matters relative to risk have been considered in the Alternative Options and Reasons for decision sections of this report. 13. Consultations Undertaken 13.1 Not applicable. 14 Category of Exempt Information 14.1 Not applicable. 15 Background Information Speed and Quality Review of Development Control Phase 2 Review of Development Control 16 Policy/Budgetary Compliance 16.1 The proposed decision complies with the Council s overall policies and corporate aims and objectives and does not give rise to any change in policy relevant tot this service area or new expenditure not falling within the approved budget. 17 Key Decision Information 17.1 Not application 18 Conflicts of Interest Declared (if any) 18.1 None declared 19. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee (if any)

10 17.1 None granted. 20 Appendices 20.1 None AJ/SMP