A to Z Index:
  • Share this |


SAC Report No. 6

The Processing of Planning Applications(June 2005)

Summary

The purpose of this report is to set out the process, conclusions and recommendations of the sixth investigation by Aberdeenshire Council’s Scrutiny and Audit Committee. As part of its 2004/05 programme of investigations, the Scrutiny and Audit Committee approved on 3 November 2004 terms of reference for an investigation into the processing of planning applications. The purpose of the investigation was (1) to examine the process of handling planning applications from pre-application discussion to advising applicants of the decision, including user friendliness, adherence to procedure, accessibility, consistency, time to decision, and efficiency of process (costs/staff per application), and (2) to make recommendations on any improvements.

The investigation began in December 2004 and the Committee heard evidence from 29 witnesses during 6 evidence gathering sessions. The Committee was assisted in the investigation by an independent external expert, Mr Denis Munro formerly Director of Planning for Perth and Kinross Council. Views about the effectiveness of the Council’s procedures for processing planning applications were sought from agents who operate within Aberdeenshire, from external planning consultees and from the Scottish Executive.

In Aberdeenshire, planning applications are dealt with by the Development Control section within Planning and Environmental Services. There are 53 posts in the Development Control section, including a head of service, two managers, six area planning officers, 24 planning officers, six planning inspectors and 12 development services assistants. The development control section was reorganised in 2003/04, into six Area Teams based in the Areas they deal with, with the exception of the Marr Team that is co-located with the Kincardine and Mearns Team in Stonehaven. Planning surgeries are held in seven different locations in Aberdeenshire, outwith the Area Planning Offices. Aberdeenshire registered 3932 applications in 2003/04, which placed it in the top three authorities in terms of numbers of planning applications in Scotland. The development control section’s fee income for 2004/05 was £1.790m and net expenditure (ie costs borne by the Council Tax payer) was £807,000. Although it is a relatively small part of Planning and Environmental Services in terms of numbers of employees, in terms of involvement it is seen by the Director as a key area requiring a significant proportion of her time and attention. Planning also takes up a disproportionate amount of /councillors/index.asp’ time. At Area Committees’ meetings, typically 50% to 75% of the agenda is concerned with planning matters. It is a high profile service.

Through the evidence made available to the Committee, the following issues were identified as key to the Service:

  • Performance
  • Consistency of decision making
  • Public access and customer care
  • IT problems
  • Management and staffing issues
  • Communications

Despite considerable challenges facing the Development Control section, its performance, measured by the Scottish Executive’s standard, compares well with other Councils. However, in order to help the Service build on this performance, the Scrutiny and Audit Committee has put forward a range of conclusions and recommendations which include:

  • The Council and the management of the service must demonstrate understanding and appreciation of the difficulties facing staff and also, most importantly, commitment to working to improve the situation. Difficulties identified include IT problems, recruitment, excessive unpaid overtime, communications and staff morale.
  • To improve the performance of the Service, consideration should be given to introducing an option to give officers delegated powers to refuse an application on the basis of failure by applicants and/or their agents to provide all the requested information within two months of submitting the application. The current delegated approval arrangements should be reviewed, with the recommendation that a formal time limit should be introduced for the consultation with the local councillor.
  • With regard to measuring the quality of the Service’s performance, the proposal to use a design forum to provide feedback on how the Service adds value to the planning process should be investigated further.
  • To improve consistency in interpretation and application of planning policy, the Committee recommends that briefings and training should be provided for /councillors/index.asp on planning matters, in particular to give them more guidance on “material considerations” and to remove any misconceptions about when it is appropriate to depart from policy.
  • The Committee is firmly convinced that the Council is open to challenge on the grounds of partiality, unreasonable behaviour or maladministration if the Council’s policies and procedures are not applied consistently by the Council. The Committee believes that the present situation with obvious variations lays the Council open to unacceptable reputational and financial risk which the Council must take steps to address. As a key priority, the Council needs to adopt some common principles for procedures to be followed by all Areas when dealing with planning applications. Officers should be asked to draw up proposals taking account of:- the need to give the public confidence in planning decisions (requiring fairness and transparency)- the need to give the public access to and involvement in the decision making process- formal guidance from the Scottish Executive on site visits, representations and hearings, The proposals should be put to full Council for consideration, as it is essential to get universal agreement to the new arrangements.
  • Consideration should be given to various measures to help manage planners’ workload eg, by operating an appointments system for meetings with planning officers, reducing the frequency of sub-office surgeries, and reducing the public opening hours of planning offices. In considering how to provide more controlled access to planning officers, thought needs to be given to how the pre applications enquiry service can be accommodated.
  • The Development Control Service need to ensure regular agent forum meetings take place to discuss new developments, and appropriate briefings are provided for community councils.
  • Steps need to be taken to ensure applicants and agents are aware of where they can find information about the progress of their application.
  • An on-line application and payment system should be introduced at the first opportunity. It is essential an early decision is reached on the electronic payment method to be used.
  • As a pilot customer satisfaction exercise, the Council should put out a simple tick box questionnaire to applicants asking for feedback on the level of satisfaction with the administrative aspects of the application process, when the decision notice is sent out.
  • The relocation of the Marr Office should be treated as an urgent matter and considered through the asset management review process with a view to determining its potential as a spend to save project.
  • The project board for the SX3 planning system should be revived and enter new negotiations with SX3 to seek assistance with the operational problems and get a firm commitment on the introduction of the ‘3 tier’ system.
  • To safeguard staff morale and the Service’s reputation, there is a need to ensure that there is a consistent management approach, and that all Area Teams have a common understanding of policy issues and therefore are empowered to take decisions.
  • Consideration should be given to how more flexible deployment of existing staff in both development control and the policy teams can be encouraged to meet urgent staffing shortages or work pressures. The use of external planning consultants should also be considered as a possible measure for increasing flexibility and relieving acute workload pressures.
  • The Council needs to look at a variety of options for recruiting and retaining planning staff eg streamlining career progression to make it comparable with that of other councils, better career development opportunities, salary enhancements, improved relocation packages, new recruitment strategies and actively promoting the “growing our own” policy.
  • The Committee sees no advantage to be gained in moving back to the former arrangements for the line management of administrative and clerical staff, and certainly not before the new arrangements have been tried out for a longer period. Management need to ensure appropriate effort is put into making the new arrangements work successfully at a local level. The Formartine office is commended as an example of good practice.
  • As a morale-raising exercise, there should be opportunities for all staff in the six Area Planning Offices to meet regularly to share ideas with colleagues, discuss consistent practice and freely raise issues with managers.
  • Communications between the Policy Planning Team and Development Control need to be improved. In particular arrangements for consultation and the sharing of information on issues relating to the Local Plan need to be reviewed by the Policy Planning Team.
  • An integrated system for electronic consultation should be introduced as early as possible.
  • With regard to external consultees, consideration should be given to providing Development Control staff with more guidance and training on the types of applications which require SEPA input and the timing of consultation requests.

Full Report