Planning performance and fees: consultation

Planning Performance

The Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 places annual performance reporting by planning authorities on a statutory basis. The Act sets out that Ministers may make further provision about the form and content of performance reports in regulations.

The Planning Performance Framework^[9] established by Heads of Planning Scotland in 2011-12 has been a valuable tool in demonstrating planning authorities' commitment to continuous improvement and all the work which they do in delivering the planning service from determining planning applications, producing development plans and policies to working with other corporate services and sharing and learning from each other.

We have seen a significant improvement in the markings awarded to authorities for the 15 Key markers, demonstrating a commitment to continuous improvement. Year on year there has been an overall increase in the number of green ratings awarded to authorities. However, performance against some of the markers remains variable, in particular, with regards to decision making. This has required developing an alternative approach to assessment particularly where an authority is determining applications on average within the statutory timescales.

The PPF has also evolved since its inception to provide a balance of both statistical and qualitative information with the introduction of the key markers, to authorities undertaking peer review of each other's reports and the enhanced role of case studies to evidence how they are delivering a better service to customers and also adding value to the process when considering planning applications.

Our experience of the PPF provides us with a valuable place in which to start to look again at how the performance of the planning system is measured going forward.

Set out below is our initial proposition for the structure and content of performance reports going forward.

Planning Performance Reporting

Purpose of Planning

The Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 states that the purpose of planning is "to manage the development and use of land in the long term public interest".

The Scottish Government considers that there is merit in developing an accompanying statement about the performance of the system, a vision of a system we all want to see. There is clear consensus around the key components which all users of the system believe contribute to good performance. Taking these into account the vision could be:

The Planning System must provide certainty, consistency and clarity to all those who participate in it, through effective engagement, policy, decision making and communication.

Should we set out a vision for the Planning Service in Scotland?

• Yes
• No

Do you agree with the vision proposed in this consultation paper?

• Yes
• No

Do you have any comments about the proposed vision?

We have learned a lot from the Planning Performance framework (PPF) and the Key Markers over the years and this has helped inform the direction we are proposing to move in. What is proposed below is not a dramatic step change but rather a refocussing of the PPF to take account of the outcomes in the National Performance Framework, better integrate key performance indicators and take account of customer and stakeholder views.

Throughout the parliamentary process of the Act we have been clear that we would like performance reporting to include the outcomes and impacts which planning delivers rather than just the volume of applications and time taken to determine them.

There are a number of possible approaches to measuring these. National Planning Framework 3 and Scottish Planning Policy are currently structured around 4 outcomes: a Successful Sustainable Place; a Low Carbon Place, a Natural Resilient Place; and a Connected Place. With preparation of National Planning Framework 4 underway this presents an opportunity to ensure that the outcomes we are looking to measure filter through the NPF and LDPs into decisions and ultimately development on the ground.

The 2019 Act sets out that the NPF should include a statement about how Scottish Ministers' consider that development will contribute to each of the outcomes listed below:

(a) meeting the housing needs of people living in Scotland including, in particular, the housing needs for older people and disabled people,

(b) improving the health and wellbeing of people living in Scotland,

(c) increasing the population of rural areas of Scotland,

(d) improving equality and eliminating discrimination,

(e) meeting any targets relating to the reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases, within the meaning of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, contained in or set by virtue of that Act, and

(f) securing positive effects for biodiversity.

However, our preferred approach is to use the outcomes in the National Performance Framework^[10] as it provides the necessary scope with which to ultimately measure the impacts of planning. We consider it to be an excellent way to demonstrate how planning plays an integral part in people's lives. We also believe that reporting in this way can play a key role in expressing the contribution of the planning system to wider outcomes within local authorities and with stakeholders and communities.

A recent project commissioned by the RTPI in Wales^[11] provides a useful example of how planning's contribution to our national outcomes could be presented.

Preparation and Content of reports

As previously mentioned the PPF has evolved over the 8 years since its introduction and over that time we have learned a lot about what works, what doesn't work and how. This provides valuable insight for taking forward development of a refocused performance framework. For instance, a common criticism of PPF reports from some stakeholders has been that they are prepared by the authority in isolation with little opportunity for customer input and that they only highlight the good stories the authority wants to tell. They don't always reflect on when things have gone wrong or not as intended and what has been learned from that to prevent the same issue arising again in the future. Some authorities have indicated that they have undertaken some targeted engagement in the preparation of their report, and we would like to see this rolled out across all authorities. This could be through customer/stakeholder forums or liaising with representative bodies/associations.

Our current expectation is that reports should cover the following areas:

Statistics – range of published statistics and other quantitative information which Planning Authorities collect, including the annual statistics published by the Scottish Government.

Customer Service – customer service should extend beyond applicants to those who comment on applications, policies and plans as their views on how their engagement has been handled are also important and can have a key role in helping to build trust and confidence in the planning system.

Engagement – how the authority has carried out their engagement activity during the reporting year. Examples of the types of engagement to be considered include the authority's approach to Local Place Plans added through the new Act, pre-application discussions with applicants, agencies and other statutory consultees and also how they are engaging with elected members and other stakeholders on the development of the LDP and proposed applications.

Case Studies – specific examples which demonstrate how authorities are helping to deliver better development and places and their contribution to national outcomes. Both good examples and examples where the process hasn't necessarily worked as intended to help identify areas for improvement.

Outcomes – key achievements/metrics contributing to the national outcomes.

Improvement – areas for improvement and to outline how the authority is learning from and sharing good practice with other authorities and stakeholders.

Resources – how an authority has allocated/used its available resources during the reporting period both financial and staff resource. This could include how staff have been allocated to different disciplines to address workload pressures or provide a focus on particular types of applications, policy issues or the development of Regional Spatial Strategies, Local Development Plan or how an authority has engaged in the preparation of Local Place Plans.

Is the proposed approach to the content correct?

• Yes
• No

Do you have any comments on the proposed content of Planning Performance Reports?

Do you have any comments or suggestions as to how reports should be prepared?

What statistical information would be useful/valuable to include and monitor?

What are the key indicators which you think the performance of the system and authorities should be measured against?

Do you have any other comments to make with regards to how the Performance of the Planning System and Authorities is measured and reported?

Do you have any suggestions about how we could measure the outcomes from planning such as:

• Placemaking
• Sustainable Development
• Quality of decisions

Do you have any suggestions about how planning's contribution to the National Outcomes contained in the National Performance Framework should be measured and presented?

National Planning Improvement Co-ordinator

The Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 includes a power for Ministers to appoint a National Planning Improvement Co-ordinator to monitor and provide advice to planning authorities and others on the performance of general or specific functions.

The Co-ordinator will be appointed by Scottish Ministers following an open recruitment process. Stakeholders' views on the role of the co-ordinator were invited during the consideration of the Planning Act and during pre-consultation workshops. We consider that the co-ordinator should sit within government and ultimately report to Scottish Ministers. Their role will be focussed on the performance of the planning system as a whole; working on behalf of the Scottish Government and Scottish Ministers positions them well to do that that. The Co-ordinator may be provided with administrative support from the Planning and Architecture Division (PAD). They will provide advice to Ministers in an impartial way, including looking at PAD and Department for Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA) and Scottish Ministers' role. Initially we think that the Co-ordinator should help to develop their role in collaboration with stakeholders once they are in post so that they can learn from what does and doesn't work.

Do you have any comments/suggestions about the role and responsibilities of the National Planning Improvement Co-ordinator?

We will continue to work collaboratively with the High Level Group on Planning^[12] and other stakeholders on the development and implementation of the new statutory Annual Reporting framework and the role of the National Planning Improvement Co-ordinator.