Agenda item

To consider progress against the Development Services Review Action Plan. 

49.1          The report of the Head of Development Services, circulated at Pages No. 66-99, provided an update on progress against the Development Services Review Action Plan.  Members were asked to consider the report.

49.2          The Head of Development Services explained that the Development Services Review was approved by Council in April 2018; the review was supported by an action plan to help improve the whole service, not only planning, and this was attached in full at Appendix 1 to the report.  One of the key actions related to the implementation of a new structure for Development Services and key appointments had been made, particularly in respect of the Growth Hub and the partnership with Gloucester City Council which had already been beneficial in terms of joint improvement projects.  The vast majority of the actions related to Development Management and would act as a platform for further improvement.  In terms of customer contact, officers would shortly be piloting an electronic method of notifying applicants and agents on the progress of their planning applications and she drew attention to the slide, displayed at the meeting, which showed what this would look like.  The new method would be more user-friendly and easier to understand which would make the process quicker.  It would initially be used for householder applications before being rolled out for larger applications.

49.3          The Business Transformation Manager introduced herself to the Committee and gave a brief overview of her background.  She felt that her role had created an opportunity to take a step back and think about how things could be done differently, something which was not always possible for officers to do when carrying out their day-to-day roles.  Delivery of the detailed action plan was a starting point for improvement and a number of projects were in progress – she was keen to involve members of the team and had built this into the timescales for delivery.  She felt it would be helpful to go through some key actions to give Members an idea of what was being done.  With regard to Action B.8 - Update validation checklist in line with Joint Core Strategy and investigate portal link to validation - she explained that there were various application types, some of which were quite complex, so it was intended to give customers the information they needed to self-serve.  The document was very interactive and told customers exactly what was needed to ensure their application was ‘valid’ and would include links to direct them to additional information on the website.  In terms of Action B.11 – Prepare a framework/protocol for undertaking Planning Performance Agreements and publicise – she explained that, on larger applications, it was sometimes necessary to agree a programme of work with the applicant and it was proposed to do this upfront, by working through the planning issues, for an additional fee.  As well as increasing planning income, it would ensure that both applicants and officers understood exactly what was needed and would enable officers to be more responsive to customer requirements.  Planning Performance Agreements could also help to overcome some of the problems in respect of engaging with statutory consultees, e.g. County Highways, within set timescales which was a difficulty for all local planning authorities.  It was intended that the framework would be the same as that used by Gloucester City Council and would be rolled out across the county as an example of good practice.  

49.4           In terms of Action B.20 – Manage five key officer-led workstreams – the Business Transformation Manager indicated that planning had an impact on everyone’s life, whether it be through submitting an application themselves or being affected by an application in their local area, and communication and understanding of the planning process was key.  As a starting point, it was intended to produce a questionnaire which would be targeted at people using the pre-application advice service, as this was an optional service, to find out more about their experience.  There was a lot of scope to improve customers’ perception of the planning service so this was a very important action.  Linked to that, Action B.21 – Improve clarity of “who’s who” and what is happening at Planning Committee – had been included in response to a comment arising from the Planning Advisory Service review about members of the public and their experience of Planning Committee.  It was recognised that, for some people, a planning application may be their only experience of engaging with the Council and Planning Committee acted as a ‘shop window’ for the Council so a few small changes could help to improve that experience.  For example, it was not always clear to people in the public gallery what was happening during Committee meetings so it was proposed to introduce an explanatory pamphlet setting out the process and a seating plan to identify who was speaking.  Action B.22 related to Member training and ensuring that Members had the knowledge to deal with difficult applications, given the huge growth agenda within Tewkesbury Borough and the potential for contentious applications.  It was intended to hold regular briefing sessions following the corporate induction for new Councillors in May 2019.

49.5          In terms of the other service areas, the Head of Development Services indicated that the Planning Policy team had been focusing on the preparation of the issues and options stage of the review of the Joint Core Strategy, and the preferred options stage of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan which was out for consultation.  The team would also be reviewing the Statement of Community Involvement which was out of date.  With regards to economic development, the Growth Hub was in operation, although the formal launch would not be until the following month, and a key element of this would be ensuring the Council’s services had a business-friendly approach.  The Place Programme was a key priority for the Community Development team and a Member briefing was being arranged to clarify and define the place approach. 

49.6          A Member raised concern that planning enforcement was not as good as it should be and he noted there was a shortage of officers within that department.  In response, the Head of Development Services acknowledged that there had been some difficulties within that area and there had been a time when there was only one officer in post; however, she was pleased to report that an officer had been appointed from within the Technical Administration team who would be learning on the job and an experienced Enforcement Officer had also been appointed on an interim basis to help with key cases. She was confident that the right people were now in place to help to make improvements in the short term, including delivery of the Planning Enforcement Plan which had been approved earlier in the year.  A Member understood that one of the actions within that plan was to provide a regular enforcement report to Planning Committee and he questioned why that was not being done.  The Head of Development Services advised that consideration was being given to what information could be included in that report and it would be taken to the Planning Committee by December.  Members had been sent an email earlier that week with statistics in terms of the number of applications determined and whether they had been approved within the required timescales etc. and it was intended to circulate this information on a quarterly basis going forward.  She accepted that Members were not currently able to see details of enforcement cases online and she would be working with IT to address that shortly.

49.7           A Member drew attention to Action A.7 – Devise detailed Key Performance Indicators and ensure consistent framework between Gloucester City and Tewkesbury Borough Councils – and noted that the target date had slipped from October 2018 to March 2019; in total, he had calculated that the target dates for 22 of the actions within the plan had been changed and he questioned what the reason was for this.  The Head of Development Services explained that the initial target dates had been over-ambitious, and appointments to key roles had taken longer than anticipated so a lot of dates had been changed to make them more realistic; she confirmed that the new dates were achievable.  In terms of the Key Performance Indicators, these were reported regularly to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as part of the quarterly performance management report but a baseline report would be prepared by March 2019 so Members would have a more detailed picture of the framework.  A Member expressed the view that this was not soon enough and, following a brief debate, the Deputy Chief Executive agreed to bring a report on the Planning Key Performance Indicators to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 8 January 2019.  In response to a query regarding Action B.1 i) - Ensure senior officers have skills and expertise to make robust recommendations – the Business Transformation Manager clarified that there were processes and procedures in place but these needed to be brought together into a procedure manual for senior officers.

49.8           A Member noted that reference had been made to the Joint Core Strategy and Tewkesbury Borough Plan but not to Neighbourhood Development Plans and she questioned what weight they would hold once approved.  The Head of Development Services clarified that the action plan was not intended to be an overall programme for the Development Services section so there would be other work ongoing within the various teams which was not included.  The local development scheme set out that, once approved, Neighbourhood Development Plans must be taken into account.  Another Member went on to raise concern about the lack of communication in respect of place planning which needed to be addressed.  The Head of Development Services absolutely agreed that the place approach needed to be re-designed and she had met with the Lead Members for Community and Health and Wellbeing to start these conversations.

49.9           Having considered the information provided, it was

RESOLVED          1. That progress against the Development Services Improvement Plan be NOTED.

2. That a further update be brought to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in six months’ time.

3. That a report on Planning Key Performance Indicators be brought to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 8 January 2019.