Agenda item

The Planning Manager introduced a report regarding planning performance, resourcing, and the Customer Insight and Improvement Programme.

Members were informed that the Government had set out performance standards for Local Planning Authorities, measured over a two-year rolling period.  Slough Council’s performance for the speed of decision-making exceeded the national average.  97.1% of Slough’s major applications were decided within 13 weeks’, compared to the national average of 88.2% of applications.  85.3% of Slough’s applications were decided within the statutory timescale compared to the national average of 88.8% of applications; however this was above the 70% target set by Government.

It was explained that whilst officers strove to determine applications for non-major developments within eight weeks’, work was undertaken with applicants to negotiate proposals that would be acceptable in planning terms, and this led to time extensions being agreed to reach a positive decision for many applications.  With regard to major developments, applicants were encouraged to enter into Planning Performance Agreements to allow officers to take a project managed approach to large and complex schemes.  This approach had resulted in 91% of all planning applications being granted.  The Council had had no major application appeals overturned; and only 1.4% of non-major development decisions had been overturned at appeal.

Members were informed that due to the high level of permanent vacancies in the Planning department, that in order to meet demand and customer expectation there was currently a significant reliance on agency staff.

As part of the Council’s ‘Futures Programme’ work was currently underway to improve the Planning department’s digital offer to improve the application process for customers.  Planning systems were being redesigned to meet customer need, with the focus being improving information and establishing an online application tracking facility.

The Chair then invited comments and questions from Members.

During the course of the discussion, the following points were raised:

• A Member asked if agency staff were on long or short-term contracts.  It was explained that there were a range of contracts in place.  Initially, short-term contacts allowed for a trial period to gauge the standard of the officer’s work.  The market for agency planning officers was very competitive and Slough had to compete with other local authorities, including London borough councils and the private sector.  The ambition of the Council’s apprenticeship scheme’s was to ‘grow our own’ staff, this was viewed as a positive approach which led to improve business continuity and a better customer experience.
• It was queried what incentives were offered to attract and retain staff.  It was explained that Slough salaries were competitive, and there were benefits to working in the public as opposed to the private sector.  For example: a comparatively generous leave allowance, flexible working and pension arrangements.
• A Member asked if the Council undertook Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) in-house or if this work was contracted out.  It was explained that it was necessary to undertake EIA for major schemes, and this work required an officer to have specialist skills and knowledge.  If there was capacity within the Planning department to carry out the necessary assessment, it was undertaken in-house; otherwise the work was procured externally.
• A Member asked how many women there were in the Planning department.  It was confirmed that there were five women within the team.
• It was asked if the use of temporary rather than permanent staff generated a saving.  It was explained that agency staff cost approximately 25-30% more due to the agency fee.  However, the add-on costs, such as National Insurance and pension benefits, of recruiting permanent staff, meant the overall cost variance was negligible.
• It was queried whether regulations arising from the Grenfell Fire would result in additional staff resources being needed to carry out enforcement action.  It was reported that the Council currently had one permanent and one agency enforcement officer.  The Council’s Cabinet had recently agreed to allocate sufficient resources to enable officers to enforce breaches in relation to properties used for Airbnb rental.  It was explained that planning applications would be considered in light of the Grenfell Fire, but this was currently under review nationally and the detail of future requirements was not yet known.
• A Member asked if the Planning department received sufficient in-house IT support.  The Planning Manager said he would welcome any additional support.  He explained that as part of the Council’s transformation programme, work was currently being undertaken to rebuild the planning IT systems, in conjunction with partners, Agile Application.  The development of enhanced online support and the development of features such as chat bots were being explored.

The Chair thanked the Planning Manager for the report.

Resolved –

(a)  That the report be noted.

(b)  That the Committee expressed support for suitable IT assistance being provided to the planning department.