Agenda item

Scrutiny of the annual performance report prior to submission to Welsh Government.

Phil Thomas delivered a presentation, introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Craig O’Connor and Andrew Jones:

• Members asked about the timescale for digitising all the microfiches and tree records and were advised that the digitisation process is quite complicated and largely dependent on budget constraints. The process may take a few years to complete and that there is no definite timeline at the moment. The process might be expedited if secure funding through the migration of Land Registry data could be secured, but this is not guaranteed.
• A member enquired about the figures and percentages related to the pre-application advice service, noting its potential as a revenue earner and was advised that during the period 2023-2024, they closed 263 applications seeking pre-application advice and received 282 new submissions. Of those that had pre-application advice, 35 led to planning applications, with 34 approved and one withdrawn, resulting in a 100% success rate. The revenue from this service was around £55,000.
• Concern was expressed about the low percentage (4.5%) of enforcement cases resulting in notices served, out of 286 cases. Officers explained that enforcement action is only taken for serious breaches of planning control in the public interest. Many breaches are resolved through negotiation or retrospective planning applications, and some cases do not warrant enforcement action due to minor breaches or lack of expediency. Informal negotiations often resolve breaches without the need for formal notices, and all decisions go through a delegated panel process for scrutiny.
• A member asked about the target for member decisions against officers' recommendations, noting that the target was less than 5% and enquiring what "good" would look like in this context. Officers explained that the target of less than 5% is set by Welsh Government, and the range of 5-9% is considered fair. They emphasised that planning officers and committee members should generally align in their decisions, but acknowledged that the Planning Committee exists to make balanced judgments in the public interest. They noted that the current figure of 6% sits comfortably within the fair range and reflects the collaborative working between officers and committee members.
• A member suggested improving public understanding of how planning works, possibly through a statement at the beginning of each planning meeting. Officers acknowledged the complexity of planning processes and the need for better communication. They mentioned that there is a preamble in the agenda with key principles and policies, but agreed to take the suggestion away and consider how to make the information more concise and accessible to the public.
• A question was asked about the £800,000 collected in fees and how often this is reviewed. Members were advised that the fee structure and planning services are currently under review by Welsh Government, with a consultation running until January 17^th. This review aims to make planning services more resilient and cost recoverable.
• An enquiry was made about the low action rate (4.5%) from 286 enforcement complaints and whether this highlights the need for improved training for Community and Town Councils. Officers explained that many enforcement cases are resolved through informal negotiation or retrospective planning applications, and only serious breaches result in formal notices. They emphasised the importance of communication and training for Community and Town Councils to better understand the enforcement process.
• A question was asked about the sources of enforcement reports and whether the current level of reporting is appropriate. Officers stated that reports come from a mix of residents, town councils, and county councillors. They noted that the current level of reporting is manageable and necessary to address various concerns, even if some cases do not result in formal enforcement action.
• A member asked about benchmarking, noting the absence of national figures from Welsh Government and suggesting the need for a more standardised approach to data collection and benchmarking across local authorities. Officers acknowledged the frustration with the lack of benchmarking data since 2019 and explained that Welsh Government is currently consulting on a new planning performance framework. They mentioned that the Council has continued to review its performance annually despite the lack of statutory requirement and expressed hope that the new framework would address benchmarking issues. The Chair will consider a way to push for more benchmarking data to be made available to officers and members – ACTION
• Concerns were raised about the capacity for enforcement and the need for improved communication with Community and Town Councils. Officers acknowledged the need for better communication and training for Community and Town Councils. They emphasised the importance of explaining the enforcement process and the legal complexities involved. They also mentioned the action plan to improve these relationships and provide updated training.
• A member suggested setting a day to invite members of Community and Town Councils for a session to improve understanding and communication. The suggestion was well-received, and it was agreed that organising such sessions could be an effective way to disseminate information and improve the understanding of planning processes among Community and Town Councils.
• It was questioned whether service users are encouraged to provide formal feedback or if feedback is primarily received in the form of customer complaints. Officers explained that while they used to have a customer feedback form, it was discontinued due to a low response rate. However, they do receive both positive and negative feedback through complaints and compliments. They mentioned that they are considering reintroducing a feedback mechanism, possibly by sending out questionnaires with decision notices.

Chair's Summary:

The Chair acknowledged the good performance in several areas, including the high percentage of applications determined within eight weeks (93%), the high approval rate of applications (97%), and the success of the pre-application advice service (100% approval for those who followed the advice). He emphasised the importance of improving communication and relationships with Community and Town Councils, particularly regarding enforcement. He also highlighted the gap between public expectations and the actual enforcement process, stressing the need for better explanation and transparency. The Chair highlighted the need for better customer feedback mechanisms and the importance of benchmarking against other authorities and suggested exploring peer-to-peer reviews and sharing performance data with neighbouring authorities to improve transparency and performance evaluation.

The committee supports the plan to improve communication and provide updated training for Community and Town Councils and suggests organising sessions to invite members of these councils to improve understanding and dissemination of information. The committee wished to thank the officers for the reports and for the team’s continuing hard work.