Agenda item

4.1       The Committee received a report which provided a mid-year update on the    performance of the Town Planning service in terms of the timeliness and             quality of its planning application decision making and the success rate of         planning appeals for the first two quarters of 2022/23. Performance against all measures exceeded the Department for Levelling Up Homes and     Communities (DLUHC) and relevant internal performance indicators.

4.2       The Committee was advised and noted: -

4.2.1     That the volume of Applications for the first two quarters of the year was       consistent and figures were like those of the previous year for the same    period. 

4.2.2    That the number of applications determined exceeded those which had been received in the first quarter and this was due to the Town Planning Service resolving an increased number of outstanding cases.

4.2.3    That the number of pre-application advice requests had increased, and this indicated that there was recovery following the increase of fees at the start of 2021.

4.2.4    The speed of decision making continues to surpass the DLUHC threshold for Major, Non-Major and Other applications. The Major applications rate is 93%, Non-Major Applications is 77% and other Applications is 78%. 

4.2.5    There have been 306 Extensions of Time (EOTs) used during the first two quarters for Non-Major applications and this has resulted a mean of 40 additional days. The additional period covers the need to receive, assess and review revised documents. There were 192 EOTs used for Other applications and the mean additional days to review these applications was 28 days. This is reflective of there being a lesser need to reconsult and assess revised drawings for these types of applications.

4.2.6    That the quality of decision making at Westminster continued to be high and that only a very small proportion of Major and Non-Major planning applications were overturned at appeal. There had been an increase in the number of appeals dismissed or partly dismissed from 66% to 70% from the previous year.

4.2.7    There were two appeal decisions in the first quarter which may potentially assist the service with future interpretations of policies in the new City Plan. These were the sites at Leconfield House and 2-49 Cambridge Street).

4.3       Members held a discussion and noted the following: -

4.3.1    That the determined appeals provided guidance on how to consider certain material considerations during the decision-making process and were a good source of information.

4.3.2    That appeals decision assisted and aided the Service with interpreting   future Policies.    

4.3.3    That the use of the Pre-Application Advice Service had decreased in recent years, and this may be attributed to the current economic climate. Members were reminded that fees had been increased and the format of the service amended in January 2021 to improve the service and move towards cost recovery and this is likely to have also impacted on use. Numbers for 2022/23 do though show an increase in pre-application requests. There are currently fewer larger complex developments, and these types of developers are typically more heavy users of the pre-application advice service. The larger developers have indicated that the advice service should be extended and include components such as the ‘fast tracking’ of applications. The Committee were informed that wider economic impacts in the property industry had reduced margins for minor schemes and resulted in smaller developers not using the service so extensively.

4.3.4    Members were advised that use of the pre-application advice service had reduced during the Covid period by around 30% and that statistics indicated that there had been reductions in planning applications nationally and this was between 20% to 30%.

4.3.5    Members agreed that the pre-applications advice service should continue to be promoted and be extensively marketed. The Committee noted that part of the marketing strategy could include the benefits of using the service which include resolving significant issues with schemes prior to the formal planning application stage and being supported with early community engagement. The Committee also noted that usage of the service led to better decision making, improved planning outcomes and higher approval rates. Members noted that developers were already signposted to the pre-applications advice service.

4.3.6    Members were reminded that use of the pre-application advice service was voluntary and confidential. Residents are informed of proposed scheme when a formal planning application is made. The Committee was advised that works would continue to ensure that there are broader consultations with communities at pre-application stage and that stakeholders have an opportunity to have an input in prospective schemes during their early development stage. 

4.3.7    The Committee was advised that over 90% of planning applications are submitted via the Planning Portal. There are a variety of methods which interested parties can use to communicate their views. These include direct emails to the service and liaising with the relevant amenity society. In addition to neighbour notification letters the service also places an advert in a local newspaper and erects a site notice to notify people of each application. Members were advised to forward their suggestions to the service on how to further improve communications and the process of receiving enquires regarding planning applications.

4.3.8    Members noted that the DLUHC did not specify performance targets regarding planning appeals. Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) typically set their own performance indicators for Planning Appeals. The Committee were reminded that appeals were lodged by applicants and that their dismissal meant they were refused. The non-determinations of planning applications can also be appealed, as can any conditions imposed on a planning permission.

4.3.9    Members were advised that it is ‘common ground’ among all LPAs that their primary purpose is to ensure their decisions deliver high quality development. The Committee was informed that performance indicators are not an influence in the outcome of a planning decision, but rather they are an indicator of the quality and professionalism al of the service that has been provided. The Committee was informed that a recent appeal regarding costs lodged against the service had been dismissed and the officers report had been commended by the Planning Inspectorate. The Committee was informed that most planning applications considered by LPAs were approved.

4.3.10  Members noted that the performance indicator for appeals had been set at             60% for several periods and queried whether consideration should be made           to increase the bar to 65%.

4.3.11  Members noted that most appeals lodged related to delegated decisions and    requested that future reports include examples of these appeals.

4.3.12  Members were informed that the Town Planning Service would continue to improve and were reminded that London LPAs had different priorities and Westminster has its own unique features and challenges, such as a high number of listed buildings and other heritage assets.

4.3.13  Members noted that there had been an increase in the number of withdrawn applications and were advised that these figures were due to the Service identifying and closing old dormant applications. The Committee was informed that all planning applications needed to be accounted for and receive a decision. The reasons for applications becoming dormant vary and range from the applicant not wanting to pursue the application or concerns regarding proposals that prevent their determination. 

4.4        Members thanked officers for their report and responding to enquiries raised    by the Committee,

RESOLVED:

1. Members noted the contents of the report and the on-track performance of the Planning Service.

2. That the pre-applications advice service continues to be promoted and be extensively marketed and that the marketing strategy include the benefits of using the service.

3. That future reports on planning applications and appeals performance include examples of appeals which were lodged against delegated decisions.