CLACKMANNANSHIRE COUNCIL
Report to Council 21st June, 2007
Subject: Review of the Scheme of Delegation in Relation to Planning
Applications
Prepared by:
Stephen Bell, Head of Development Services
1.0
SUMMARY
1.1.
A review of the scheme of delegation in relation to decisions on planning
applications is required because of a number of internal and external drivers.
1.2.
The increasing number of applications, increasing public involvement,
increasing public expectations and the way the current scheme is designed
means that the proportion of minor applications being reported to Committee
is steadily rising.
1.3.
This increases workload for Members and Officers and can limit the time
available to consider fully the larger scale, more strategic and controversial
applications.
1.4.
The Scottish Executive is keen for Councils to amend processes and
procedures to ensure that decisions are made efficiently and effectively so
that the planning system is an enabler of sustainable development rather than
a bureaucratic hurdle to economic growth. The Planning Etc (Scotland) Act
2006 (the 2006 Act), which has now been enacted, provides for a series of
measures designed to ensure increased clarity over delegated powers within
planning authorities. In short the measures are designed to ensure that
delegation is to the lowest acceptable level whilst ensuring that major
developments are the protected remit of elected members and/or Ministers.
1.5.
It is considered that amending the Scheme of Delegation to enable members
to focus on the major applications of significant public interest, will assist
significantly in delivering a modernised, efficient and effective planning service
and help staff maintain the high levels of performance and quality that
Clackmannanshire is renowned for. The changes that it will introduce to local
decision making will serve to pave the way for change that will follow as a
direct consequence of the 2006 Act.
2.0
RECOMMENDATION
2.1.
It is recommended that:-
81927385
Page 1 of 6
(i)
The Scheme of Delegation in relation to planning and other
applications, as set out in Appendix 1 should be adopted;
(ii)
The Scheme of Delegation set out in Appendix 1 supersedes the
scheme inherited from Clackmannan District Council as amended in
January 1997 (Minute CC/97/272).
3.0
BACKGROUND
3.1.
A number of factors have led to the need to review the Scheme of Delegation
as it relates to planning applications.
3.2.
As members know from previous reports, the number of planning applications
being received in Clackmannanshire has been on an upward trend over the
past five years. This has been recognised and additional resources have
been provided to deal with increased workload.
3.3.
The hard work of professional and administrative staff, additional staff,
investment in ICT systems, improved processes and working practices, and
use of the internet have all helped the service at least maintain performance
relative to other planning authorities in Scotland. This has been achieved
despite the rising workload, not only in terms of number of applications, but
also in relation to complexity, public involvement and increased public
expectations.
3.4.
The service will always seek to pursue continuous improvement in order to
achieve high quality and performance levels. The fact that an increasing
proportion of applications have to be reported to Committee is, however, now
seen as a significant barrier to such improvement. The scheme of delegation,
which requires even minor applications to be determined by Committee rather
than by officers, needs to be amended in order to achieve the goals and
objectives the Council has set for the Service in terms of performance and
quality of development, and to reflect the Scottish Executive’s modernising
agenda for the Planning System in Scotland.
3.5.
The 2006 Act will introduce provisions requiring planning authorities to adopt
Schemes of Delegation which follow the principles set out in the White Paper
“Modernising the Planning System”. These principles are that decisions
should be made within an up to date Development Plan framework and at the
right level in the organisation having regard to the relative importance and
scale of the development itself. Members in planning authorities should be
setting the direction in terms of strategy and policy and thereafter should only
deal with major development proposals of strategic importance, or which raise
significant controversy or policy issues. All other minor proposals should be
dealt with by officers with appropriate safeguards in relation to consultation,
notification and involvement.
3.6.
The current Scheme of Delegation in Clackmannanshire incorporates a
referral system, introduced in 1997, for applications that have attracted
objections of a minor or non-material nature. Although this small extension to
81927385
Page 2 of 6
officer delegation has worked well, it has not prevented a significant rise in the
number of applications having to be referred to Committee. In any case,
given the introduction of multi-Member wards after the elections in May, this
aspect of the delegation scheme would need to be reviewed.
4.0
THE CURRENT SCHEME OF DELEGATION
4.1.
Decisions on whether or not a particular application is referred to Committee
for decision rather than determined by the Head of Service are guided by:-
4.2

Scheme of Delegation to Committees and Officers (August 1999)

Report to Council 29th January, 1997 “Review of the Development Control
Decision-Making Process”

Clackmannan District Council – Development Control Manual (1996)
These documents, when read together, set out the agreed Scheme of
Delegation in terms of which the Director of Development and Environmental
Services and the Head of Development Services are responsible for the
discharge of the Council’s functions as Planning Authority. The Director and
Head
of
Service
are
authorised
to:”Administer the policies of the Council in relation to:- … Administration of
Development Control, processing applications for planning permission of a
non-sensitive
nature,
in
conformity
with
Council
policy”.
4.3
The arrangements inherited from Clackmannan District Council stipulated that
officers are authorised to approve applications which:
are consistent with Council policy;

have attracted no objections from consultees;

are not the subject of representations from members of the public; and

there is no “conflict of interest”.
4.4
In January 1997, in order to address the issue of an increasing number of
applications being reported to Committee, the Council agreed to the
introduction of a Member Referral Scheme in the event of minor
representations being made.
This scheme worked effectively initially,
however, in recent years the proportion of applications being reported to
Committee has been increasing steadily from 12% in 2004 to 16% in 2006.
4.5
In addition to the increased workload that this creates for professional and
administrative staff, there is an impact on performance. The average length
of time it takes to deal with an application dealt with by officers is 47 days.
The average length of time taken to determine an application that is reported
81927385
Page 3 of 6
to Committee is more than twice this figure at 98 days. Whilst some of this
additional time will be as a result of longer periods being required to assess
the more complex applications, it is the case that the majority of minor
applications take significantly longer to deal with if they have to be reported to
Committee. With rising numbers of applications, a rising proportion being
reported to Committee and rising public expectations and involvement, the
current and historic levels of performance on time taken to deal with
applications is unsustainable unless steps are taken to reduce the number of
applications that have to be reported to Committee.
4.6
It is also evident from the statistics that although a high proportion of
applications are dealt with at Committee, a very small number of those
decisions differ from the officer recommendations. Over the past three years,
on average, 90% of decisions made by Committee are in line with the officer
recommendation without modification.
5.0
PROPOSED SCHEME OF DELEGATION
5.1.
The new scheme of delegation relating to planning and other applications
should be read in the context of the Council’s Standing Orders and the
Council’s overall Scheme of Delegation to Committees and Officers. This will
ensure that decisions taken under delegated powers reflect the Council’s
agreed planning policies. The recommendations contained within this report
will ensure that the powers delegated to officers can be determined from a
single document as opposed to a trawl through at least three separate
sources of information which is the case at present.
5.2.
The new Scheme of Delegation should follow certain principles and seek to
achieve particular objectives. It should:(i)
Ensure that applications made under the Planning Acts are dealt with
as
efficiently
and
as
effectively
as
possible;
Enabling officers to determine minor planning and other
applications will speed up the decision making processes of the
Council with consequential benefits to service users.
(ii)
Ensure that decisions are made at the appropriate level having regard
to
the
significance
of
the
development;
Minor applications, not requiring members input will be decided at
officer level. Members will decide significant or contentious
applications.
(iii)
Ensure that there are sufficient safeguards in place to maintain
openness and accountability in the decision-making process.
The 2006 Act requires that reasons for decisions including
approvals must be given by the Council. Officers are bound by
this Rule. In due course local rights of appeal will be available
81927385
Page 4 of 6
where an officer refuses an application. In the meantime officer
decisions may be appealed in the same manner as committee
decisions. Development Services will continue with the current
practise of officer reports and fully documented reasons in
connection with delegated decisions.
(iv)
Ensure that there are sufficient safeguards and management
mechanisms in place to maintain high standards in terms of decisionmaking.
Decision making will be undertaken at Chief Officer level.
(v)
Ensure that through the use of Information and Communications
Technology and the internet, information on planning applications is
made available to members and anyone who may have an interest so
that they can be involved in the decision-making process;
(vi)
Ensure that the Scheme enables Elected Members to focus on the
more controversional or complex applications of strategic significance
including those that are not in accordance with the Development Plan,
but may be recommended for approval, and those the subject of
significant objection.
(vii)
Ensure that the Scheme allows officers to determine a wider range of
applications and are able to make the full range of decisions including
the
refusal
of
permission.
The primacy of the development plan means that members have
already determined in principle how applications should be dealt
with in terms of their type, scale and location. Only if applications
propose developments outwith policies and proposals in the plan,
but may be deemed acceptable by officers, or where they present
new issues, or are significantly controversial in other respects
should there be a need to refer the matter to Committee for
decision.
(viii)
Ensure that the Scheme is compatible with the provisions of Section
43A of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 as far as possible until the
passing
of
secondary
legislation.
This legislation is not yet in force and the Scheme of Delegation
will be reviewed once any regulations have been brought into
force. The recommendations contained in this report are,
however, broadly in line with the spirit of the relevant provisions
of the 2006 Act.
5.3
A number of Councils across Scotland have reviewed, or are in the process of
reviewing, their Schemes of Delegation having regard to the provisions of the
new legislation, increasing workload and the need to modernise processes
and procedures. In writing this report, and in devising the new scheme for
Clackmannanshire, an assessment of these other schemes has been
81927385
Page 5 of 6
undertaken to establish evidence of good practice. Some Councils have
merely tinkered at the edges of their schemes but others have taken the
opportunity for a more radical review. Given the issues set out in Sections 3
and 4 of this report, it is considered that a complete review of this Council’s
scheme was in order.
5.4
Having regard to the principles and objectives set out above, it is proposed
that the scheme of Delegation in relation to Planning Application decisions
should be as set out in Appendix 1 to this report.
6.0
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
6.1.
None.
6.2.
Declarations
1. The recommendations contained within
this report support or implement Corporate
Priorities, Council policies and/or the
Reference
Community Plan:
Corporate Priorities
Council Policies
Community Plan
2. In adopting the recommendations
contained in this report the Council is acting
within its legal powers.

3. The full financial implications of the
recommendations contained in this report are
set out in the report.
This includes a
reference to full life cycle costs where
appropriate.

Head of Service
Director
81927385
Page 6 of 6