Scottish Government

Introduction
Background: Development Control Performance
Statutory Background
Government Policy
Performance: General
Householder Developments
Minor Business and Industry
Other (Minor) Developments

The Planning Audit Unit
Issues Arising for Planning Authorities
Good Practice
Points for Action

Issues for The Scottish Office
Best Value
Conclusions

1. The need to reduce planning delays in general and speed up decisions on planning applications in particular have been concerns of long-standing to central government. Returns of planning applications decided are submitted twice yearly by the planning authorities to The Scottish Office and, since 1994-95, these figures have been published for individual authorities. Given the wide variation in performance indicated by the published figures, it was recognised that there was a need to understand the reasons underlying the contrasting performance of planning authorities. Against this background and the Government's commitment to speed up the planning process an Audit Unit within Planning Services Division was set up.

2. This report, which is based on the first year's work of the Planning Audit Unit, is in 3 parts:

Background: Development Control Performance

• analyses the 3 returns submitted by planning authorities since local government reorganisation
• sets out the objectives and programme of work of the AU and considers the impact of the Unit on development control performance.

Issues arising for Planning Authorities

• identifies examples of good practice in relation to the handling of planning applications which could be applied more widely
• highlights areas where action is required to improve performance.

Issues for The Scottish Office

• responds to issues which, on the basis of the audits, planning authorities believe The Scottish Office should address.

The work of the Planning Audit Unit in relation to the Government's Best Value initiative is also discussed.

3. The report highlights aspects of good practice that can be built on and identifies a number of key issues which need to be addressed to secure the provision of an efficient and effective development control service. One of the main longer term aims of the Unit is to communicate best practice in development control through the revision of Planning Advice Note 40: Development Control as a key element in securing sustained improvement in performance. The publication of this report marks a first step in that direction.

Statutory Background

4. Article 14(2) of The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Scotland) Order 1992 requires planning authorities to determine an application for planning permission within 2 months of receipt of a valid application. This period can be extended where it is agreed in writing between the applicant and the planning authority. In the case of planning applications where an environmental assessment is required, the period for determination is 4 months.

Government Policy

5. The Government recognise that planning applications vary in their complexity and a number of performance targets for determining applications within 2 months have been set. These are:

• 80% of all applications
• 90% of household applications
• 85% of minor business and industry and other minor development proposals.

With some exceptions, planning authorities have generally not performed well against these targets.

Performance: General - Target 80%

6. Since local government reorganisation, 3 returns of planning applications determined have been submitted. This information is summarised in the Statistical Appendices. For the first period (April-September 1996) 2 authorities failed to make a return; 1 failed to do so for the second period (October 1996-March 1997); but all authorities submitted information in the most recent round (April-September 1997).

7. For Scotland as a whole the percentage of planning applications determined within the statutory 2 month period has varied between just under 60% to just over 63% (Figure 1). The return for the 6 month period from April 1996-September 1996 indicated that only 2 authorities (West Lothian and Shetland) determined more than 80% of planning applications in 2 months; in the following period no authority reached the target; in the latest returns, which cover the period from April 1997-September 1997, 3 authorities (West Lothian, Shetland and Angus) met the target.

Figure 1

8. The number of authorities determining between 70% and 80% of applications within the statutory period has risen from 5 in the first return after local government reorganisation to 6 in the 2 most recent returns. The majority of planning authorities determine 50-70% of applications within 2 months. The only significant improvement has been in the number of authorities determining less than 50% of applications in 2 months. In the first return after local government reorganisation 5 authorities (East Lothian, Edinburgh, Argyll & Bute, Scottish Borders and Glasgow) determined less than 50% of their applications in 2 months; this rose to 7 (East Lothian, Moray, Edinburgh, Scottish Borders, Glasgow, Orkney and Dundee City) but, in the most recent returns, had fallen to 2 (Edinburgh and Orkney). Figures 2, 3 & 4 summarise performance based on the 3 returns.

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Householder Developments - Target 90%

9. The latest returns saw the national percentage of householder applications decided in 2 months exceed 80% for the first time since local government reorganisation; 5 authorities (Angus, East Ayrshire, Inverclyde, Shetland and West Lothian) achieved the Government target of determining more than 90% of their householder applications in the statutory period.

The performance of a further 13 authorities was above 80%. One authority (Orkney), however, determined less than 50% of their householder applications in 2 months. Local authorities' most recent performance in relation to householder applications is summarised in Figure 5

Figure 5

Minor Business and Industry - Target 85%

10. The percentage of minor business and industry applications decided in less than 2 months in the period April-September 1997 was under 58 and although this is a slight improvement on previous returns it is well below the Government's target of 85%. Indeed no authority met the target in the latest returns. Dumfries and Galloway (82%) came closest, followed by West Lothian (81%), Angus (80%), East Ayrshire (77%) and Shetland (76%).

Eleven authorities determined less than 50% of applications in 2 months; for East Dunbartonshire, East Lothian, East Renfrewshire and South Ayrshire the figure was less than 30%. Most recent performance is summarised in Figure 6.

Figure 6

Other (Minor) Developments - Target 85%

11. According to the latest returns less than 55% of planning applications for minor developments were determined in 2 months, a slight drop from the previous period. Only Angus met the Government's target of 85%, although Dumfries and Galloway, East Ayrshire, Shetland and West Lothian determined over 70%. Authorities deciding 40%-50% of other minor developments within 2 months were East Lothian, East Renfrewshire, Moray, Falkirk and Stirling; less than 40% were determined in 2 months by East Dunbartonshire, Edinburgh and Midlothian.

12. The specific objectives of the Unit are to:

• review the statistics on planning authority performance
• understand more precisely the underlying reasons for performance
• assist authorities whose development control performance is below par
• identify best practice in the efficient handling of planning applications
• communicate best practice through the Planning Advice Note series
• monitor the effectiveness of advice.

13. The initial work of the Unit involved carrying out pilot audits, in 2 contrasting authorities - Moray and West Lothian. The pilot audits were conducted to:

• gauge the willingness of local authorities to participate
• assess the implications for staff resources in The Scottish Office
• establish an effective method of working (Figure 8)
• determine whether any significant new insights to the development control process would be revealed.

Figure 8

14. The outcome of the pilots was sufficiently positive that, in May 1997, Ministers agreed a 2 year programme of audits. The programme contains a mix of authorities in terms of size, geographic characteristics and performance.

15. By June 1998 reports for each of the authorities included in the 1997/98 programme and for Glasgow had been submitted to the councils involved. This annual report draws on the experience of these audits and the pilots. Figure 9 illustrates progress with the audit programme.

Figure 9

16. The audits have confirmed a wide variation in performance between Councils and clear differences in management practices and office procedures. A range of good local authority practice has been identified but also areas where action is required to provide an efficient and effective development control service.

Good Practice

17. Management commitment, on the basis of our work to date, is a key element in the provision of an efficient development control service. It is clear that, in those authorities which perform well in relation to the Government's performance targets, there is a close connection between committed management and an efficient development control service. Management commitment goes beyond exhorting staff to do better and requires managers to ensure that staff are aware of what is required of them both generally and in relation to specific applications, ensuring that efficient procedures are in place, monitoring the progress of applications and taking action where slippage occurs. The importance of management commitment cannot be over-emphasised.

18. In some authorities an individual or small team has been given responsibility for processing minor and/or non-controversial applications; the advantages of this approach can, we believe, be seen in the performance figures of authorities which have such arrangements. Clearly the benefits of this streamlined approach will be greatest in those authorities with the highest proportion of minor applications but, in general, it should allow greater professional input to be made on those applications which raise significant planning issues.

19. Access to the planning service is generally good. Unlike most other services there has been a long-standing statutory requirement to involve the public in the planning process. As a result there is a wide variety of information on planning in a user friendly form which is readily available in reception areas. Moreover, the reception areas, even where they are not ideal in terms of location and layout, are generally welcoming with friendly and obliging staff. Some authorities have efficient and effective methods for the validation and registration of planning applications. In addition a number of authorities have actively taken steps to decentralise the planning service through area offices, surgeries, etc.

20. Computer systems are increasingly valuable not just for recording details of planning applications, sending out standard letters, etc but also for performance monitoring. In some rural authorities which, of necessity, have a number of area offices, the introduction of compatible and interactive computers, e-mail, etc is bringing major benefits. But the introduction of sophisticated new technology will not in itself result in a more efficient development control service if it simply mirrors practices which are deficient and defective.

21. Local design awards have been introduced by a number of authorities. We think these awards are invaluable and commend the approach as one element in raising the profile of design generally and in improving the quality of new development.

Points for Action

22. In the local authorities which have been audited there is a reservoir of knowledge and experience of the planning system. But knowledge and experience are not, in themselves, sufficient. Management structures and practices aimed at securing the delivery of a high quality development control service need to be put in place. In particular, this requires managers to put in place performance standards for the service and ensuring that staff are performing well in relation to these standards.

23. Culture and ethos must be changed in those departments where development control performance is slow. A more positive approach to the service has to be developed and, in particular, staff must be more conscious of the effects of delays and poor communication on individuals and businesses. The needs of the customers of the planning service (public, developers, interest groups, elected members) should be given a higher priority. Changing the culture and ethos of a department, which in some departments has been a problem of long-standing, involves an approach based on the following principles:

• ensuring that staff are aware of what is expected of them individually and collectively with clear lines of responsibility
• developing more effective channels of communication internally and externally
• providing better operational procedures and working practices
• devolving greater responsibility to case officers for processing applications
• focusing management responsibilities on identifying and monitoring service and performance standards.

24. Establishing and monitoring standards of service and performance are essential.

A number of elements are involved:

• Service Standards Statements - COSLA's Model Charter on Development Control has been used as a basis for the preparation of these statements by a number of authorities
• Job Descriptions - clear, up-to-date and specific job descriptions setting out what is expected of individual members of staff are essential
• Staff Appraisal - the introduction of some form of performance appraisal of staff so that individual strengths are recognised and measures are taken to address particular weaknesses.

25. We recognise the issue of staff appraisal within local authorities goes much wider than the development control service but the Planning Audit Unit were very conscious that good performance was not acknowledged while aspects of poor performance were not being addressed. In most authorities there was a great deal of pressure on staff and the performance of some individuals who, for a variety of reasons, were contributing less than they should to the work of a team, was simply being allowed to continue unchallenged. We see this as a major contributor to poor performance and continuation of this situation undoubtedly undermines the commitment and morale of other staff.

26 . Pre-application discussions can make a significant contribution to the efficient handling of planning applications where they are focused and well managed. Experience from the audit has shown that this is not always the case. Where the advice from the planning department is vague or where different officials give different opinions or, in extreme cases where officials have changed their mind, pre-application discussions can be devalued and significant delays may result. This has also been accompanied by escalation of costs where, for example, detailed drawings have had to be revised and resubmitted. Pre-application discussions have therefore to be managed more effectively, for example by preparing notes of meetings so that key areas of agreement and disagreement (this is, of course, without prejudice to a Council's final decision) are recorded. In addition, for major proposals which have wide-ranging implications, it may be necessary to establish a team as a basis for developing a corporate view on proposals and to see the implications of amendments and revisions. We also believe that authorities should make much greater use of design briefs as a means of establishing at the outset, the planning authority's views on issues such as the balance of land use, access, parking and servicing requirements, public transport provision, design issues, landscaping, etc. There may be scope for a more systematic evaluation of pre-application discussions and how they can be made more effective; this could be done as a research project or through joint work with local authority representatives.

27. As regards processing applications, there are a number of common factors emerging:

• internal targets for processing applications should be set at the outset and monitored
• internal and external consultation should be more effectively targeted
• in some authorities there is scope for more delegation of decision making (although greater delegation is not, in itself, a guarantee of speedy decision making)
• Committee reports should be more succinct with key issues for elected members clearly identified.

In local authorities which, prior to local government reorganisation, comprised a number of district councils, a clear priority is to harmonise practices and procedures to ensure consistency in the delivery of the development control service. This also applies in the case of the local authorities which cover a large area and which operate their development control service through a number of area offices.

28. Planning committees do not appear always to work as effectively as they might. In some areas there is scope for further delegation of decision making so that, in committee, elected members can focus on major applications or proposals where there are significant unresolved objections. In committee, officials should desist from lengthy statements and concentrate instead on highlighting key issues. In some Councils decisions on applications are continued over several meetings; in others there is, in practice, a limit on how often an application can be continued and we commend this approach. We are also conscious that there is a wide variety of practice in relation to the conduct of site visits. The Nolan Committee, in its report on Standards of Conduct in Local Government, made a number of recommendations relating specifically to planning, including that "Planning Committees should consider whether their procedures are in accordance with best practice, and adapt their procedures if necessary, setting them out in a code accessible to councillors, staff and members of the public". Some authorities have already issued codes of conduct for councillors on planning matters; in other authorities, these are in preparation. In its preliminary response1 to the report of the Nolan Committee the Government has indicated that it is wholly supportive of councils' procedures being in accord with best practice and being transparent, and would encourage councils to prepare codes of practice and/or charter statements. The detailed content of such documents is a matter for individual councils. We therefore urge councils to study the Government's response to the Nolan recommendations and to act on them.

29. Improving the service to customers of development control can be achieved in a number of ways:

• acknowledgement letters to give the name and telephone number of the case officer
• weekly lists to indicate name of the case officer, likely timescale and method of decision making
• greater use of simplified, user friendly application forms (Planning Advice Note 48 contains example forms and a number of planning authorities have revised their forms to positive effect)
• wider use of leaflets/brochures in plain language on key issues in development control
• reviewing information and guidance to ensure it is relevant and up to date.

30. We also see considerable merit in workshop sessions with developers, community groups, etc so that the planning authority improves its understanding of customer requirements and also for customers to understand better how they can contribute to the more efficient handling of planning applications. In some areas we feel that the development control service is hampered by the existence of out-of-date development plans, particularly, local plans. There is no doubt that up-to-date development plans can assist efficiency and consistency of decision making in development control. Local authorities should, therefore, look to ways of improving performance in the production of more up-to-date local plans.

31. The audits have revealed a number of areas where action by The Scottish Office could lead to improvements in the development control process.

32. The complexity of planning legislation was a common criticism. The consolidation of planning legislation in May 1997 was welcomed and a research report on how Part I of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992 could be simplified has recently been published by The Scottish Office. Consideration is being given to the research findings. It should, however, be borne in mind that there are limits to the extent to which legislation can be simplified without prejudicing its effectiveness. In considering the need for legislative change we will also consider the scope for better guidance on any proposed changes.

33. Performance targets were raised by all authorities. Some authorities felt they were arbitrary and, in some cases, unrealistic. The Government remains firmly committed to the general performance target of 80% of planning applications to be determined within 2 months. But it recognises also that there may be scope to introduce revised and additional targets. For example many planning authorities have said that it would be useful to have a target for the percentage of applications to be determined within 3 months; at present it would appear that the priority attached to processing applications efficiently reduces when the 2 month target is overrun. Applications cannot be allowed to languish in the system. So we propose to take this whole issue forward over the next 12 months in discussion with COSLA and the Accounts Commission.

34. The process of consultation with Historic Scotland (HS) in The Scottish Office was commented on by all authorities. In particular, they thought it unrealistic to expect that 80% of applications involving listed building or conservation consents could be determined in 2 months. There is no explicit target for handling such applications. However, they are a cause for concern as the majority of planning authorities determine less than 40% of listed building and conservation area consents in 2 months, and the national average in the period from April 1997 to September 1997 was 27%. We therefore propose establishing a working group to consider the scope for improving working practices in relation to planning applications involving listed buildings or conservation areas. The working group will comprise officials from planning interests within The Scottish Office and local authority representatives.

35. In a number of audits local authority officials and community groups indicated that a guide setting out the planning implications of conservation area designation should be prepared. This will be published shortly.

36. A number of authorities, particularly those where planning and building control were in the same department, raised what they perceived as an overlapping of planning and building control legislation and the scope for deploying staff more effectively. While there are internal management issues which need to be addressed in local authority Planning and Building Control Departments, the extent to which planning controls could be drawn into building control or vice versa is an area where further study is necessary.

37. In February 1998 Circular (4/1998), The Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions, was issued. There were a number of reasons which prompted this revision, but an important factor was the findings in a number of audits that, on many occasions conditions were being used slavishly and unthinkingly and as a matter of routine rather than being designed to secure specific planning objectives. We believe also that authorities seeking to enforce planning controls more effectively would benefit from a more rigorous approach to the wording of conditions attached to planning permissions. To progress this a joint working group has been established with COSLA to draft model planning conditions.

Box 1: Best Value - Key Principles

Accountability - being held to account and giving an account - requires good information and decision-making processes.

Transparency - being as open as possible - requires Councils to acknowledge and publicise the rights of members of the public and to take account of these.

Continuous Improvement - being clear about what we are trying to achieve, focusing on why and how we are carrying out services, checking that we are achieving goals, and seeking to improve performance - requires a culture of genuine endeavour, not blame.

Ownership - involving everyone with an interest or "stake" in the organisation - requires understanding of and commitment to Best Value at all levels within and outside of Councils.

39. Development control is a key element in the planning process. The audits of local authority development control service which have been carried out so far have highlighted a number of reasons for the contrasting performances of local authorities in determining planning applications. They have identified a number of areas where administrative and professional practice is carried out to a high standard. But they have also indicated areas where there is significant scope for improvement and which present major challenges for managers in relation to the establishment of efficient procedures, the motivation of staff and the monitoring of performance. Based on the first year's work of the Planning Audit Unit,issues which local authorities need to address in the provision of an efficient and effective development control service are summarised below.

General	Management commitment	Managers have to manage. They must ensure that staff are aware of what is required of them
	Job description/ appraisal	Clear, up-to-date and specific job descriptions and appraisal of performance are needed
	Administrative support	Support should be well organised with clear cut roles and emphasis on team working
	Performance monitoring	Managers should set targets, monitor progress of applications and take action where slippage occurs

Processing Applications	Pre-application discussions	Discussions should involve the key players, with areas of agreement and disagreement recorded.
	Registration	Applicants should be advised immediately of invalid applications. Registration should take place within 48 hours.
	Practices and procedures	Harmonisation and consistency of practices is important between teams and area offices.
	Minor applications	An individual or small team should be dedicated to processing minor and non controversial applications.
	Consultees	Timeous and relevant planning responses from consultees should be secured.
	Revised schemes	Be prepared to refuse rather than wait indefinitely for amendments
	Reports	Succinct reports should be prepared with key issues highlighted.
	Conditions	Conditions should meet the 6 tests specified in Circular 4/98.

Customer Care	Development Plans	Up-to-date local plan coverage is essential.
	Service standards	The standards that the public can expect should be clearly specified.
	Planning information	Up-to-date information on main issues should be available.
	Front counter staff	Staff should be helpful, courteous and familiar with the development control process.
	General correspondence	The name and telephone number of the case officer should always be provided.
	Weekly list	Case officer, likely timescale and method of decision making should be identified.

40. We believe that local authorities have welcomed the approach adopted by The Scottish Office in relation to the development control audits. The work of the Planning Audit Unit has benefited greatly from the positive attitude taken by local authority staff and customers of the planning service both in interviews and at seminars. While improvements in development control performance will not occur overnight, there needs to be a sustained commitment to improvement in the speed with which planning applications are determined. We believe that there is scope for efficiency gains (which, in some authorities, is quite considerable) without reducing public access to the planning process and without undermining the achievement of quality in new development.