PAPER B3
Committee : DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
Date : 19 NOVEMBER 2002
Title : BEST VALUE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2003/04
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
BACKGROUND
In November 2001, the DTLR published the new targets for 2002/03 for the handling of planning applications.
The targets were categorised in the following terms:-
• Major applications - 60% in thirteen weeks
• Minor applications - 65% in eight weeks
• Other applications - 80% in eight weeks
At that time, DTLR also indicated that they intended to introduce other changes to the BVP Indicators, as well as introducing new minimum performance standards for 2002/03, based on performance against these targets.
The DTLR/Best Value Performance Indicators 2002/03 were subsequently published and 78 Authorities were cited as having failed to reach the appropriate standard for any one of the three categories, and are now the subject of a performance standard for the current financial year. The performance standard did not apply to this Council as we had performed above the threshold in all three categories.
Working on the assumption that the criteria for being affected by the performance standard would remain unchanged, a report was submitted to this Committee in May 2002. The report concluded that action would need to be taken since we would be below the threshold of 25% within thirteen weeks for dealing with major applications.
The report set out quite clearly that, in the view of the Development Control Manager, the Council would be identified later in the year as a failing Authority in terms of the determination of major applications, despite the fact that our performance in respect of minor applications and other applications was improving and reasonably encouraging. As a corollary it was explained that it was imperative that the target for the current financial year (ie 2002/03) achieved the same standard as that expected for the failing Authorities; if we achieve that level of performance, it was his view that we should avoid being named as a failing Authority in two consecutive years.
Consequently, in the Development Control Performance Analysis, we set a performance target on major applications of 45% within thirteen weeks for 2002/03 and 50% within thirteen weeks in 2003/04. In order to achieve these targets, Members agreed to the following measures:-
• Appointment of new officer to lead on major applications
• Creation of two career posts
• Significant improvement to consultation response times
• Review of delegation system
• Review of criteria for deferring applications
Quite clearly, the establishment and the appointment of a Head of Planning Services would also help to alleviate the problems.
Our resources have been directed at achieving our own performance targets for dealing with major applications. There has been a significant improvement, and so far in the current financial year (1/4/02 - 31/10/02) our thirteen week figure for dealing with major applications has risen to 41% compared with an overall figure for 2001-02 of less than 21%.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2003/04
The Government has now published the consultative document on Best Value Performance Indicators 2003/2004. The Local Government Act 1999 provides powers for the Government to specify standards of performance that must be met. Failure to meet a performance standard will normally be judged as a failure to achieve Best Value for that particular service.
On major applications, the Government propose to apply a performance standard to those Authorities that determine less than 28% in thirteen weeks in 2001/02. The standard that these Authorities would expect to reach is to determine 50% of major applications within thirteen weeks in 2003/04. The performance standards to 2003/04, as set out in the preceding paragraph, apply to the Local Planning Authorities set out in the annex to the consultative document, and includes this Council among 65 other Local Authorities.
The standard that this Authority is now expected to reach is to determine 50% of major applications within thirteen weeks in 2003/04. Members will note that this coincides with the target that we set in our own development control performance analysis over six months ago.
The attached illustration shows the progress that has been made in terms of processing major applications, starting from the low base point for 2001/02. A simple projection would seem to suggest that the target of 45% for 2002/03 may well be achieved, and that with the various service improvements outlined in this report, the target for 2003/04 can also be achieved, and indeed has to be achieved. It is timely that this performance standard has been applied at the start of the Best Value Review process. This will allow us to review in a comprehensive way the procedures currently in place.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Since the report submitted to this Committee six months ago, the two trainee planner posts have been created and filled by an external appointment and an internal transfer, utilising funds generated by increased planning fee income. However, the increased income is not as substantial as originally projected, and consequently the new Officer to lead on major applications will need to feature as a proposed growth item in next year’s budget and therefore the successful candidate will not take up his/her position before April 2003 (assuming that the growth item is successful).
OPTIONS
1. That the report be noted and the Head of Planning Services be requested to:-
• Re-affirm the requirement for an additional Officer to deal with major submissions with the full support of the Development Control Committee
• Carry out an urgent review of the criteria for
i) deferring applications, or
ii) requesting site visits
• Carry out a broader review of the operation of the delegated system for the determination of applications
• Carry out a review of internal procedures and practices
• Apply appropriate pressure with the objective of bringing out an improvement in response times in terms of both external and internal consultees to monitor the situation and report back to this Committee at regular intervals
• To monitor the situation and report back to this Committee at regular intervals
2. That the report be noted and that the Head of Planning Services be authorised to carry out a combination, but not all, of the measures outlined in Option 1.
CONCLUSIONS
The principal objective of this report is to outline to Members the gravity of the present situation and give an overview of the measures that have already been taken and those that need to be taken to enable the Development Control Section to determine a substantial increase in the number of major applications processed and determined within the prescribed time period during the present financial year and, more importantly, 2003/04.
CURRENT ACTION AND PROPOSED ACTION IN RESPONSE TO REVISED INDICATORS
Having had the benefit to foresee this development, various actions have been initiated since May 2002.
• Continue to encourage pre-submission negotiations
• Continue to offer facilities to applicants/agents to make pre-submission presentations to this Committee/Council
• Provide Chairman/Local Member with copies of any pre-submission written material
• Prioritisation of major submissions on receipt through the registration process
• Afford the Chairman/Local Member and other Members the opportunity to discuss the application following submission at an early opportunity
• Prioritise early target date driven consultations with statutory and non-statutory bodies, including internal consultees
• Wherever possible, preparation of draft report inside eight weeks of receipt of the application
• Where necessary, preparation of draft legal agreement prior to reporting application to Committee
• Issue decision notice within two days
In addition to the steps taken above, which are essentially good practice, we have now appointed two Trainee Planners, one of whom is an additional post.
The improvements achieved in this area are significant, but by no means conclusive and will need to be maintained with yet further improvements if we are to satisfy the requirements of the ODPM by dealing with an excess of 50% of major submissions in thirteen weeks in the next financial year.
When giving careful analytical consideration to the situation, the current performance indicators and the recently introduced performance standard, it is clear that we need to address the matter in a comprehensive way. There would be little point meeting one target only to fail in another area. A related series of measures are proposed as set out below. Whilst the Council will need to demonstrate improvement in its performance on major applications, any changes to internal procedures and consultation responses will benefit performance on all applications. The following range of measures are proposed:-
a. The appointment of an additional Planning Officer to deal with major submissions
b. The urgent review of the criteria for
i) Committee deferral of applications
ii) Committee requests for site inspections
c. A broader review of the operation of the delegation system for the determination of applications
d. A review of internal procedures and practices
e. An improvement in response times to consultation on applications. In order to achieve Member involvement in this process, it is proposed to hold a follow up event to the Development Day held earlier this year.
A revised and updated Development Control Performance Analysis which shows the various targets and standards, together with latest performance statistics is attached for Members’ information.
In combination with other measures outlined in the earlier part of this section of the report, I am reasonably confident that, if there is no significant change in workload, this will enable us to progress towards the locally set performance standard of 45% of major applications being dealt with within thirteen weeks for the current financial year, whilst not seriously impacting on the other applications, which probably make up 90% workload.
The recommendations set out below, I believe, will bring about the necessary improvements and ensure that those improvements are maintained, enabling this Authority to move towards the overall performance target of 60% for major applications which will also progress the overall performance on all types of application.
RECOMMENDATION
Re-affirm the requirement for an additional Officer to deal with major submissions with the full support of the Development Control Committee
• Carry out an urgent review of the criteria for
i) deferring applications, or
ii) requesting site visits
• Carry out a broader review of the operation of the delegated system for the determination of applications
• Carry out a review of internal procedures and practices
• Apply appropriate pressure with the objective of bringing out an improvement in response times in terms of both external and internal consultees to monitor the situation and report back to this Committee at regular intervals
• To monitor the situation and report back to this Committee at regular intervals
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the report be noted and that the Head of Planning Service be authorised to:-
• Re-affirm the requirement for an additional Officer to deal with major submissions with the full support of the Development Control Committee
• Carry out an urgent review of the criteria for
i) deferring applications, or
ii) requesting site visits
• Carry out a broader review of the operation of the delegated system for the determination of applications
• Carry out a review of internal procedures and practices
• Apply appropriate pressure with the objective of bringing out an improvement in response times in terms of both external and internal consultees to monitor the situation and report back to this Committee at regular intervals
• To monitor the situation and report back to this Committee at regular intervals
Contact Point : Andrew Ashcroft - Head of Planning - Tel: 823556
C Hougham - Development Control Manager, ☎ 823565
M J A FISHER
DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND ENVIRONMENT SERVICES