Skip to main content

Agenda item

Development Management Improvement Plan

Purpose

To provide an update on progress against Phases I and II of the DM Improvement Programme and make recommendations for further improvements (Phase III), following the Planning Advisory Service report.

 

Recommendation

That Cabinet:

a)    Notes the improvement progress to date, and

b)    Approves the changes detailed in paragraph 5.1

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member for Planning and Regulatory Services introduced the item.

 

The purpose of the item was to provide an update on progress against Phases I and II of the DM Improvement Programme and make recommendations for further improvements (Phase III), following the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) report.

 

The Cabinet Member outlined the report, whichidentified the progress made in implementing the improvements to DM that have been undertaken thus far and the improvements to performance that have been secured.  This included the change in the validation process, and the utilisation in extensions of time.

 

The Cabinet Member also stated that there would be changes with how Ward Members were consulted, in order to open an early dialogue with officers on cases of high local interest.

 

The Committee discussed the report, stating that they welcomed the work that had been done on the Development Management Improvement Plan, particularly in regard to the work on expediting the validation process. However it was noted that more information was needed in regard to working with Parish and Town Council Councils, and scrutinised the new engagement process with members. 

 

The Committee made reference to a letter sent by the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities dated 12th of April which addressed the Council’s performance on deciding Planning Applications.  The letter stated that the performance of the Council was 69.6%, which was below the Threshold of 70% and threatened special measures. The Chief Executive stated that since the receipt of this letter, a response had been submitted to the Secretary of State, who was satisfied with the actions taken by the Council to address performance. The Chief Executive also added that performance had since improved.

 

The Committee discussed the new process of engagement with ward members which had been mentioned in the Cabinet Member’s introduction. The Committee asked for further detail on the PAS report, which referenced that consultation with members at the end of the application process added delay, and wanted to know how this functioned. The Business Manager stated that it undermined the ability of the Officer to negotiate with the applicant, and lengthened the application process. Members also raised concerns over deciding to refer an application to Committee before the Case Officer made their final assessment. It was also stated that the previous process had led members to engaging with the Case Officers early in the process. It was outlined that expressing an intention to call a report in early could feel like pressure on the officer, regardless of intention. Officers also reassured members stating that  Members would know whether an application needs to be referred to Committee early in the process from community correspondence.

 

The Business Manager stated that the process over referrals to Planning Committee would ultimately be made by the Constitution Working Group, to make recommendations to Council. The Business Manager stated that the improvements in efficiency as detailed in the report would allow room for more engagement with Parish and Town Councils, and that ultimately the Working Group would need to decide on how to balance efficiency with good engagement.

 

The Committee requested that further detail on the following matters be provided, which the Business Manager and Cabinet Member addressed during the meeting;

  • The Government target for Officer delegated decisions was 90%, and the Council’s actual figures were between 95% and 93%. The Business Manager stated that the accurate figure would be distributed to members after the meeting, including figures on what percentage of applications went to Committee.
  • Where the delays on applications were due to awaiting statutory consultees, the PAS advice was that the Case Officer delay the application only where it would make a difference to the outcome of the application due to sensitivity over the topic (eg. protected species or dangerous highway impact).

 

The Committee stated that some Town and Parish Councils have a longer interval between their meetings than the 21 day consultation period on applications, and in this case they could apply for an extension of time to allow them to respond. The Committee discussed that improvements to Town and Parish Council engagement were being made through other aspects of the Council’s work, but that further work needed to be done on involving Town and Parish Councils early in the Planning Application process.

 

The ‘alert’ system for residents to be automatically notified on planning applications, as used at West Oxfordshire District Council was mentioned. The Business Manager stated that the possibility of doing this within the existing system was still being looked at.

 

The Committee noted a change in how site notices were managed, which was mentioned in the report. The change would mean that the applicant would be relied on to putting out the notification and the committee expressed that there were concerns over the reliability of this. It was addressed that this system was used at West Oxfordshire, where it was considered successful, and that the notifications are a legal requirement, for 14 days of 21 day consultation period. The Business Manager stated that planning officers would be enforcing this. It was also stated that this could be something Town and Parishes could be asked to help with.

 

The Committee discussed costings within the department, and stated that there are largely four types of applications, those that are rejected, accepted, need tweaks, or massive changes, which would all have different resource intensities. Separately, the committee discussed a consultation that the Government was undertaking on ongoing funding issues for Local Planning Authorities.

 

Councillors David Fowles and Dilys Neill left the meeting at this point due to needing to attend Parish Council meetings.

 

Members asked whether there was an error in Annex E in regard to the charges, where officer time was costed at £50, everywhere but in one instance. Members also asked how the figure of £163.50 was calculated. The Business Manager said that a full response would be circulate after the meeting, but that this was likely due to inflation.

 

Whilst the Committee welcomed the improvements, there were comments raised at the resourcing available to deliver against the ecology and sustainability agenda as referenced in the report.

 

On a separate point, it was  noted that a new Assistant Director for Planning was now in post, with a permanent Development Manager to be appointed soon. A ‘roles and responsibilities’ document was also in train, and was going to be shared with Parish and Town Councils.

 

Cllr Michael Vann left the meeting at this point.

 

RESOLVED:  The Committee NOTED the report and its recommendations.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages