Agenda item

To consider a report from the Chief Planning Officer analysing performance on planning appeals against the BV204 performance indicator.

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report outlining and analysing performance on planning appeals against the BV204 performance indicator, an indicator of the quality and effectiveness of local planning authority decision making, which was causing concern.  The report set out actions to be taken to improve performance.

Sue Wraith, Head of Planning Services, City Development presented the report and responded to queries and comments from the Board.  She was accompanied by Robert Wade, Legal and Democratic Services, Chief Executive’s Department.

The Board were advised that at the end of November, performance was at 47.3%.  At the end of December this figure had improved to 46.6% and it currently stood at 46.4%.  The figure was relevant as it could affect the Council’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment rating.  Officers confirmed that, although the indicator would be dropped next year in the new national performance management regime, performance would continue to be measured and the information made available to Members.

In brief summary, the main issues raised from the report were:

·  The number of appeals allowed in the Green Belt.

·  Bracken Park Lodge which had gone to appeal and been allowed – officers advised that a number of points had been learnt from this case and would be included in the householder design guide.

·  The quality of decision making by the planning inspectorate.

·  Training and quality of report writing – the need to provide accurate information to Plans Panels.

·  Report writing – the introduction of robust procedures, including quality checking.

·  The introduction of a standardised template for officers’ reports and a forensic approach to report writing.

·  Comparisons with other planning authorities - this was not as bad as it seemed, as the actual number of applications going to appeal in Leeds was comparatively small.

·  CostsAwards – Members were advised that only one case had been lost where costs had been awarded against the Council.

·  Ward Members, local knowledge and membership of Plans Panels – Members were advised that this was an issue being looked at by the working group.

·  Availability of the report to the Inspectorate (appeals statement), particularly to those that had local knowledge – the Board were advised that the report was a public document and widely available.

RESOLVED – That the following actions be supported by the Scrutiny Board:

(a)  That the Plans Panels Member/officer working party be asked to consider improvements to the processes for dealing with Panel decisions made against officer recommendation.

(b)  That a letter be sent to the Planning Inspectorate raising issues around the quality of some appeal decisions and the disproportionate number of appeals allowed by a particular Inspector.

(c)  That training be undertaken by officers and Members, in particular to include character and appearance assessment and addressing this issue in the presentation of evidence.

(d)  That templates for officer reports and appeals be formatted and a standard approach be applied, and that in all cases a rebuttal of the appellant’s evidence is provided.

(Note: Councillor Monaghan left the meeting at 11.30am during the consideration of the above item.)