Contact: Roger Lawes, ext 6743 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The Regulatory Committee regularly receives details of the performance of the Development Control service as measured by the statutory Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI) and other locally adopted measures. This report summarises the recent performance of the service. There are two reasons why this information is important. First, BVPI data influences the outcome of the Comprehensive Performance Assessment. Second, the data and the story behind it provide a context for evaluating the continuing effectiveness of the procedures and protocols that underpin the development control service.

2. Best Value and Other Indicators

2.1 Under the statutory Best Value Performance regime the County Council as a Minerals and Waste Planning Authority has to set and achieve two Best Value Performance targets: BVPI 109 - the percentage of major applications dealt with within 13 weeks and BVPI 111 - the percentage of those applying for planning permission satisfied with the service.

2.2 In addition to these two statutory measures the Environment Department has adopted another standard for service planning purposes, namely the percentage of applications for the County Council's own development determined within eight weeks. The Department has also extended the satisfaction survey to cover those consulted on applications.

2.3 Records of performance are compiled quarterly. The most recent statistics are shown below:

Table 1 - Major Planning Application Performance by Quarter

(April 2002 to June 2004)

Quarter	No. Received	No. Determined	No. Determined in 13 Weeks	Percentage Within 13 Weeks	Withdrawn
02/2	20	13	11	85	1
02/3	22	8	7	88	3
02/4	18	20	11	55	0
03/1	32	21	12	57	2
03/2	32	27	15	56	3
03/3	19	36	18	50	3
03/4	22	19	6	31	3
04/1	20	24	18	75	5
04/2	22	22	15	68	0

Table 2 - Minor Planning Application Performance

(April 2002 to March 2004)

Quarter	No. Received	No. Determined	No. Determined in 8 Weeks	% Within 8 Weeks	Withdrawn
03/2	56	34	10	29	0
03/3	23	56	21	39	2
03/4	33	27	5	21	3
04/1	26	32	12	37.5	0
04/2	23	33	17	51.5	0

2.4 The national target for BVPI 109 is that 60% of all major applications should be determined within 13 weeks; the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister expects all local planning authorities to be performing at or above this level by 2006. The County Council is not obliged to accept this target. It has nevertheless adopted it for the Best Value Performance Plan as reasonable, given the increasing sensitivity of the types of minerals and waste planning applications that fall to be determined by the County Council. However, achieving the target as Table 1 indicates is, and will continue to be, a challenge.

2.5 Although the target was met in the first two quarters of this year (2004) this was the first time it had been achieved since the third quarter of 2002. A combination of factors led to the under-achievement in 2003, including the introduction of a new computer-based planning applications system (an essential requirement if the new Government e-government targets are to be met); the increasing community involvement in planning applications

(which demand more lengthy consultations and discussions) and the increasing reliance on legal agreements to achieve the delivery of associated planning objectives.

2.6 Although not a reason for complacency, despite all the difficulties the overall performance was well within the upper quartile for all county councils.

2.7 Although the first two quarters in 2004 show improvements, the performance relative to the County Council's own developments does cause reason for concern. Members will be alert to the problems of quoting percentages when only small numbers are involved, ie small numerical changes cause apparently much larger changes when percentages are referred to. Nevertheless the percentages achieved over the last year are nowhere near the target that has been set. There are a number of reasons for this under-performance. The period for decision (eight weeks) is short, particularly given the lead-in time for committee items. Consultees are often slow in responding. The problems of timetables and slow responses are amplified by the current development control protocol, that requires proposals to be considered by committee if there is an objection of any sort by a district council or an observation by a local Member, regardless of its relevance or if it could be overcome by discussion and negotiation. Delays can also arise when applications are submitted at the `wrong' time during the committee cycle; and sometimes as a result of discussions at committee.

2.8 Notwithstanding the speed with which decisions are made, BVPI 111 measures the applicants' satisfaction with the service. This indicator uses a prescribed user satisfaction survey and is conducted every three years. As a County Council the number of applicants is low compared to district or unitary councils. Accordingly a difference of a few questionnaires returned and/or a difference of a few persons being satisfied can dramatically change the overall satisfaction rate. The full ranges of the results from the 2003 survey are given in Appendix 1. The overall satisfaction rate of 91% betters the 2000/01 response rate of 86%. In all the areas of satisfaction investigated - promptness, clarity, helpfulness - performance was in the top quartile and in all areas some customers experienced an improvement in the service.

2.9 It is of course equally important to know how local residents and consultees view the service. Accordingly, alongside the statutory Best Value customer satisfaction survey of applicants a similar survey has been undertaken of residents and consultees. The results of these surveys are given in Appendices 2 and 3. Although the levels of satisfaction are not as high as for applicants, the general levels of satisfaction are high and some respondents have noticed improvements in the service.

Table 3 - Overall Level of Satisfaction

	Applicants	Consultees	Public
Very satisfied	44.1	35.6	25.5
Fairly satisfied	47.1	28.9	44.0
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	5.9	28.9	17.0
Fairly dissatisfied		4.4	7.0
Very dissatisfied	2.9	2.2	6.5

3. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

3.1 The quality of the service depends not only on the speed with which decisions are made but also on the soundness of the decisions and the level of satisfaction by customers about their involvement in the process. The matter for this Committee to decide is what procedures to follow to ensure that decision making is not unduly delayed by process, yet ensure that Members do not feel restricted in their role of representing the interests of the community in the process.

3.2 The indications are that the processes in place work reasonably well both in terms of speed and engagement in the process. However, looking behind the indicators it is also clear that performance is balancing on a cusp and easily influenced by matters beyond the Environment Department's direct control.

3.3 It is considered that the efficiency and performance of the service would be improved if this Committee agreed a Development Control Service Policy outlining the procedures involved in the development control process. This policy would set out the processes and standards for processing County Matter (Minerals and Waste) planning applications, planning applications for County Council development and for linking decisions with monitoring and enforcement.

3.4 Work has already been commissioned to review the existing service policy (adopted in 2000) and advise on possible changes.

Recommendations

1. That the performance in relation to both the statutory and informal Best Value Performance Indicators be noted.

2. That a Panel of Members be appointed to act as a sounding board for the revision of the Development Control Service Policy prior to detailed proposals being considered at the October meeting.

8832/RL