Agenda item

Purpose: To scrutinise the planning performance data reported for the quarter one 2011/12.

Councillor Brian Bedwell introduced Item 11 by reminding Members that the Commission had previously expressed concern about the Planning Service’s performance as reported at Quarter 1. Gary Lugg, the Head of Planning and Countryside, had been invited to comment on the Commission’s view that his service could do better.

Gary Lugg thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to explain the full picture behind the statistics reported through the corporate performance monitoring system. He advised that the Executive Member for Planning, Councillor Alan Law, would otherwise have also been in attendance for the Item but he had a long standing prior commitment.

Mr Lugg outlined that although Quarter 1 performance had highlighted poor performance, its causes were understood and measures had been taken to address them. The service was now in fact well on course to return to the standard that Members of the Council and service customers had come to expect. He was able to advise that as at the end of the second quarter of 2011:

·         The determination of major applications within 8 weeks was above the target set for this point in the reporting cycle;

·         The percentage of minor applications determined within 8 weeks had risen from 33% to 50%;

• 83% of all other applications had been determined within 8 weeks.

The service was on course to meet its end of year targets.

Members of the Commission appreciated the clarification on the service’s performance and a number of views were expressed on the manner in which the reporting regime was operating during this Municipal Year. Mr Lugg explained that whilst the new presentation of statistics had led to some confusion in the first quarter, he expected that future reports on planning performance would be more straightforward.

Mr Lugg then went on to explain the reasons behind the previous drop in performance. It was caused, said Mr Lugg, by:

·         A 16% drop in the number of applications received, attributable to the recession, with a corresponding drop in revenues received. In response to the drop in demand the service reduced the numbers of staff required to deal with it through a freeze on recruitment;

·         Central government cuts to Councils’ Revenue Support Grant which affected all services across the authority and prioritisation decisions taken by West Berkshire Council resultantly, including a freeze on recruitment;

• Cuts to the Planning Delivery Grant (PDG) received from the government;

When the number of planning applications subsequently rose, the Council’s freeze on recruitment created a mis-match between demand and the Council’s ability to meet it. This was exacerbated by a high rate of staff turnover, for example in the Registration Team where there had been vacancies in 5 out 7 posts. A number of planners had also left during the period and whilst they had almost all gone to higher posts, either internally or to other organisations, the effect was that there were insufficient staff to determine applications. Temporary or agency planners with the requisite experience were found to not be available on the open market.

Although some posts had been left vacant for 9 months, the service was now in fact over establishment, deliberately, to reduce the backlog that had arisen.

In response to a question from Councillor Tony Vickers, Mr Lugg agreed that the government’s stated intent to replace the PDG with the power for Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to set and retain their own fees and in effect make them self-funding should have the effect of reducing the risk of similar circumstances recurring. Mr Lugg added that the authority was prepared to begin the new operation, and was working on a start date of April, the government had however noticeably slowed its implementation timeline.

Mr Lugg advised Members that the service intended to re-introduce pre-application advice, although the current backlog dictated that it could not happen immediately. It was intended that the service would in future be self funding and discussions had been undertaken with developers to understand their expectations of cost, quality and speed. As the LPA, the Council did however have to strike an appropriate balance between the requirements of developers and the rights of objectors.

The Chairman thanked Mr Lugg for his attendance and members of the Commission agreed that the session had been sufficiently useful to warrant an update in 12 months.

RESOLVED that :

The Head of Planning and Countryside be invited to update the Commission on the performance of handling planning applications in Quarter 3 of 2012.