Planning performance: High Level Group minutes - December 2024

Attendees and apologies

• Ivan McKee MSP (Chair), Minister for Public Finance
• Cllr Gail Macgregor, COSLA Spokesperson for Environment and Economy
• Pamela Clifford, (East Ayrshire Council) Heads of Planning Scotland
• Paul Macari, (Aberdeenshire Council) SOLACE
• Rob McIntosh, (Aberdeenshire Council) SOLAR
• Dr Caroline Brown, Royal Town Planning Institute
• Heather Claridge, (Architecture and Design Scotland) Key Agencies Group
• Craig McLaren, National Planning Improvement Champion
• Susan Rintoul, National Planning Improvement Team
• Johanna Boyd, Planning Aid Scotland
• James R Blakey, (Moda Group) Applicant Stakeholder Group
• Calum Lindsay, COSLA
• Fiona Simpson, Chief Planner Scottish Government
• Andy Kinnaird, Scottish Government
• Chris Sinclair, Scottish Government
• Barry Stalker, Scottish Government (on loan to Planning Hub)

Items and actions

Welcome and opening remarks

The Minister welcomed the group to the meeting and reflected on the recent parliamentary statement he made regarding the housing emergency and that he sees planning playing an important role in finding solutions.

 

Minutes of previous meeting and action points

The group agreed the note of the last meeting. The Planning Hub and elected member training formed agenda items 3 and 8, the Investing in Planning Next Steps was shared with the group in advance of publication on 23 September and the National Planning Improvement Champion (NPIC) annual report was also shared with members in advance of publication.

The Minister requested that all actions are brought together in one place to ensure that actions across a range of areas including the Planning and Housing Emergency Delivery Plan, NPIC annual report recommendations and meeting actions can be easily tracked.

Action - SG to consider how actions can be brought together in a single log.

 

National Planning Improvement Hub

The group were provided an update on progress with the planning hub since the last High Level Group meeting. This included the completion of the development phase and the Insights Report (to be published shortly). Work is now shifting to delivery and identifying what support will be of most benefit.

 

The group discussed the recent announcement of the offshore consenting hub, and it was agreed that there was a need to clearly articulate the differences between the hydrogen planning hub, housing planning hub and offshore hub.

 

The group also discussed similarities between hydrogen and battery storage and the need for effective pre-application community engagement to ensure that impacts on communities are understood and mitigation is identified where possible. It was agreed that there needed to be better understanding of community engagement by developers bringing forward both battery storage and hydrogen developments and that this could be something which the hub could pursue.

 

Actions

• SG to write to stakeholders outlining the different offers and roles of the hubs

 

• an update on progress with the housing hub is to be provided at the next meeting

 

• NPIC to share Insights Report with group when it is published

 

National planning improvement framework and customer survey

The group was provided a brief update on the implementation of the national planning improvement framework, with cohort 3 now underway and the annual report now published. Consideration is being given to the process for the coming years, with initial thoughts suggesting that authorities focus on implementation of improvement actions rather than further assessment.

 

The national customer and stakeholder survey (NCSS) has now closed, with over 600 responses submitted. Analysts are considering how to pull together and present the results to authorities and of the national picture.

 

Action - results of NCSS to be shared with the group when published.

 

Planning Application Statistics

The group discussed the planning application statistics which were published in November. It was acknowledged that some of the recent interventions including increases to planning fees would not have impacted these stats.

 

The group agreed that the stats provide a useful but limited indicator on the performance and operation of the planning system.

The group agreed that there was a need to rebrand planning and ensure that is viewed as a facilitator of development rather than a barrier. This included demonstrating the social as well as the economic value of development.

 

The value of good pre-application discussions was also discussed and that this can have an important role in improving the quality and acceptability of applications which are submitted, and could potentially contribute to faster decisions. It was also highlighted that applicants can use the pre-application phase in order to demonstrate the value of development and as a factor to determine which proposals are progressed.

 

There was discussion about a range of data which could be helpful to understand where the bottlenecks occur in the system. It was also suggested that there is a need to ensure that planners focus on areas where they can add most value rather than tasks which could be viewed as administrative.

 

The need for data in order to inform improvement actions was discussed, this included time spent by officers on tasks outwith the consideration and determination of planning applications but also on areas such as responses by statutory consultees and other areas of blockages in the system. The national planning improvement framework assessment reports have provided a significant amount of data which may also assist in identifying areas for improvement/action.

 

Action - SG to work with HOPS and NPIC to consider what information could be collected in order to provide a statistically robust sample with which to inform future action.

 

Reinvesting planning fee income

The group discussed the forthcoming increase to planning fees and the need to ensure that the additional income is reinvested in planning departments in order to retain officers, attract new planners and identify ways to better utilise officer time. A number of points previously made about rebranding of planning and of identifying ways to improve the planning process were also reiterated.

 

The group also discussed the potential use of exemplars or case studies to demonstrate where planning has worked well and to identify the key factors which have contributed to that positive experience.

 

Actions

• invite COSLA Finance Officer to join group in order to provide wider local government finance perspective

 

• SG, HOPS and NPIC to work together to identify case studies/exemplars and identify appropriate ways to promote and share

 

Planning and the housing emergency delivery plan

The group were provided an overview of the planning and housing emergency delivery plan which includes 23 actions to be taken forward. The SG is currently in the data gathering phase in relation to stalled sites, which is a particular priority being led by a short life working group, to inform the housing planning hub.

 

The group agreed that partnership working was vital to resolving the housing emergency, including the public sector potentially providing land to be developed by the private sector. It was highlighted that masterplan consent areas present an ideal opportunity to facilitate that type of collaborative approach.

 

Elected member training update

The group were provided an update on progress with the work Planning Aid Scotland (PAS) are doing to develop a routemap for elected member training, serving as a foundation for future work and to set out an approach that will satisfy training requirements for planning committee, full council and local review bodies.

 

The group discussed timing of implementation and whether some pilot approaches could be undertaken in advance of full implementation in 2027.

 

Action - PAS to present routemap for discussion at next meeting

 

Any other business and date of next meeting

Meetings for 2025 will be circulated shortly.