Questionnaire Summary – Workshop responses - Argyll and Bute ...

A: CUSTOMERSWho are the stakeholders(internal and external) foryour part of PlanningServices?Which stakeholders are keycustomers?What is most important tothem about your Service?B: SERVICE DELIVERYSTRUCTUREShould Planning ServicesAgents, general public, Community Councils, consultees, nonGovernment agencies, ACHA, West Highland HA, Fyne Homes,Police, Scot Govt, community groups, developers, factors,SAMS, businesses, RTPI, RICS, professional networks.Members, staff, consultees, communications dept, web team,other depts - Council, Union, Chief Executive.Applicant, Prospective Developers, Architects/Agents,Community, Community/MOPs, Pressure Groups WF -objectors etc, Scottish Government, Agencies - SEPA, SW, SNGetc, Landowners, Politicians, Members, Housing Associations.Consultees - AR, EH, BO, Directors, Chief Executive,Colleagues.Community Councils, Voluntary Groups, Key Agencies,Adjoining Authorities, Scottish Government, General Public,Admin, Other Departments.Statutory consultees - SNH, SEPA, HS, HSE, Trunk Roads,Scottish Water, Civil Aviation Authority + NATS, WOSAS,Community Councils, Local Housing Forum, ForestryCommission, NHS, Access Forum,The public, Groups - publicinterest, Individuals - households, Chamber of Commerce,Applicants, Developers, Agents, Visitors to the area,Businesses. Elected Members, Roads Dept, Education, Admin,Property Services, Flood Alleviation Officer, Social Services,Environmental Health.Applicant, Agents, Councillors, Statutory Consultees,Community/Public.Developers, Agents, Businesses, Householders, CommunityCouncils, Voluntary Groups, Councillors.General public, customers, developers, staff, Scot Govt,Community Council, agencies, consultees.Statutory Consultees, Applicants, Agents, Developers, Membersof the Public.Communication - leading to protection/consideration of theirinterests. Ensuring adequate information provided by/to ABCPlanning. Resources available to deliver. Consistency -certainly prompt. Clear advice - accurate advice.Efficiency, availability, consistency, fairness, professionalism,performance, value for money.Good service delivery efficiency, pre-app process, clear DLP,+percentage performance level, interpretation of what isrequired, communication, cost, political objectives met,accessibility to information, accessibility to staff.Success, speed of decision, consistent advice, access toofficers, good communication. Service performance, fairness,transparency, equality votes. Quality consultation, take adviceon board, good working relationship. Fairness, transparency,quality environment, approachability, access to information.Amalgamation of BC/DC management at Areas impractical dueto professional nature and committee. Can't lose currentsenior technical expertise at Areas. Geographic amalgamationof teams based on workload is an option. Mobile planningservice. Reduced service for public and applicants and electedmembers. Lose local knowledge and relationships. Cost?More even spread of work. Ability to respond to enforcement.Savings - questionable. Homeworking may not be possible.Travel costs increase.Centralise BS/DM - all staf in one location. Would provide

adopt a simplified,centralised structure fordelivering Building Standards& DevelopmentManagement?Should Planning Servicesretain a decentralised servicedelivery?Should a half-way house beconsidered?What do you think is themost appropriatemanagement structure forPlanning Services? (Charts ofthe existing structure can befound in the Baseline Report– pages 85-87)What are your thoughts onwhether the existingresource of technical supportofficers be centralised, orremain within existingteams?C: GENERAL EFFICIENCYSAVINGSWhat options do you thinkthere are for service deliveryvia shared services with otherlocal authorities or partners?What options do you thinkbiggest savings -property - IT - less staff? Would lose localcustomer integration, local service delivery. Accommodation -flexi working. Risks - public confidence, perceivedaccountability, staff accepting change.Tinkering with what we have rather than wholesalerestructuringMaintain decentralisation even if managed or delivereddifferently. It's more expensive but has non-monetary value.We can only just afford to do it in context of cuts. Could bemanaged differently at 4th/5th tier. Desire to recaptureAdmin.Retain decentralised structure. Savings - questionable. Homeworking may not be possible. Travel costs increase. Homeworking may not be as efficient. Unsure. There are benefits inmaking small changes.Works as is. Keep local customer integration service delivery.No savings nat. wasteage, allows for up-turn on economy.Does not fit with transformation agenda. Forced job lossesincrease staff workload.Already there? Most efficient - as already in place.Some savings, less ATL's, 2 area teams, less localaccountability.To do it on a reduced basis would be at the expense of servicedelivery.Partial decentralisation - best of both worlds, minimal risks.Tinkering with what we have rather than wholesalerestructuring. Balance between local and central delivery atthe moment correct - BS, yes, Policy, yes, DM, uncomfortableoverlap.Lose Technicians at areas. Officers take on Technical duties.Gain specialisation. Location impact. Cover. Lose experienceof other professions. Need a manager Tech? Relocation ofstaff, reloction of staff numbers, travel time/expense.Relationships - local, communication, standardisation.Interaction with other professions. Staff from different areaseg. DC/BC/EH could disagree on outcomes eg. site visits,surveys etc.Loss of functionality at Areas. Need less! Could reduce costs.Does not fit with Area structure. may require up-skilling acrossthe team. Accommodation. Less efficient. Might requireadditional management cost.Planning/Building Standards functions operated from WestDunbarton/Hel/Lomond. System testing/development - IDOX,System/Development - Civica. Training - outsourcing ofresources.Share expertise, general shared services.Sharing of specialist services between authorities - loss of localknowledge, more remote, loss of control. If providing aservice for others, assumes capacity available. If buying inservices, assumes resources available - without sacrificing staffin process. WOSAS - can archaeological services be obtainedon another basis or from another provider?Cross branching of tasks. Amalgamation of teams ie. EH, TS,

there are to share resourcesacross Planning andRegulatory Services?What changes to workingarrangements, processes &procedures do you thinkcould lead to generalefficiency savings?Are there any Impacts orRisks relevant to thesechanges?Would staff be interested indownsizing their job i.e.working part-time?Would you be moreinterested in this option if itwas a temporary orpermanent arrangement?Are there any options forService Delivery via 3rdSector Engagement?DM, BL, DP - dependent on legislation and prof. qualificationsmanaged at area level. Joint working, resources, defining jobdescriptions, job evaluation needed. training, team moral,accommodation, one stop shop.Inspection, enforcements, shared travel, drain tests - Kim only,tapping hidden skills, utilising people 'on the spot' for simpletasks.Linked site visits, shared management, shared admin.Use Roads Technicians to do some site visits, post site noticesetc. Formalised system - email, calendar - for travel ie. carsharing, delivery of mail, posting site notices etc. across allCouncil services. Shared evidence gathering ie. investigationof breaches/complaints.Charging for pre app. Charging for exemptions under LandReform Act section 11. Shared ownership of IT equipment.Charging for planning completion certificates. Planning GainOfficer - can we get enough to justify costs. AttendingCommittees by video conferencing. Use Google Street View forsite inspections - only shows front elevations, date not known.Efficiencies by validating planning applications at area base -group split on benefit/cost. Mobile working, permits datagathering.Greater use of IT, more home working, control over travelcosts, Department suggestion scheme - to refer inefficiencies.Hot desking and touch-down zones, homeworking- rota.Scan centrally - no needs for 4 lots of equipment, work longerhours - less paper - more sickness absence, xmas - new yearcomplete closure - cost saving. Re-instate public holidays aswas - cost saving. EDMS for all services. Pool all Admincentrally. Submit documentation electronically. IT ServiceDeks also flexible hours. Contingency plans.Conflicting interests. Specialist knowledge, lack ofqualifications, legal challenges, Priorities - time. Loss ofspecialist knowledge, save money. Consistent service. Less +more efficient practicality. No distractions.Loss of overall control. Better communication, broaderunderstanding, cultural change, generation of extra income,best practice.Assumes capacity to down size. How do you assure return tofull-time status? Pension consequences.Not interested. Present as an option, financial implications -less desirable job. Risks - compressed workload - small,increased workload for full-time staff.Personal choice - if did - not enough staff, last resort. Lack ofresource, service delivery.Within parameters 5-10 percent reduction in hours - enoughresource to provide service. Sabbaticals.Depends on personal circumstances.More interest in temporary basis.NoTemporary. Impact-Risk - if it became permanent.Involving groups in community plan-making. Involvingheritage groups in production of guidance, conservation areaappraisals etc.Voluntary workers, retired officers - lack of knowledge andaccountability. Cost?

D: INCOME AND COSTRECOVERYHow can we increase incomeand cost recovery?Do you think a Coast andCountryside Trust is asuitable option forimplementing access,biodiversity andmarine/coastal projects?Volunteers to do path surveys - management of volunteers.Local Plans by local interest groups/community councils -inconsistency, only local agenda represented, how inclusive,lack of technical/specialist knowledge. Students/workexperience people to do survey work. Use of interns.Yes, partnership with Council. Risks - Competing agendas,lack of expertise, nimbyism, vested interest, greatercommunity involvement. Poor representation of local people.May not be inclusive, needs careful management.More monitoring s33A Notices - increase application numbers.Charge for pre app. Charge for completion certificates -Planning. S179 notices? - Borders Council example - VAT free.Charge for non-material amendments or don't issue them -force people to apply. Only issue electronic decisions - noteveryone has access yet. Be more commercial in approach -collection of tips at reception areas. Increase charges based ongeographical location. Charge for repeat/wasted time forcompletion inspections. 3 strikesN Notif charge, anything hard copy or disc chargeable, preapp,NMA, adverts incl. LB, Conac, double fee for retrospectiveapplications, increase in planning fees, charge for discharge ofconditions, reduce current photocopying charge and advertisethis service, one to one consultation charge, charge for PPEinfo. provided to legal, direct action costs. Increase incomebut may defer application for minor devt. Increase in unauthoriseddevt. Consistency across the board.Pre-app charges, pro-active monitoring, retro application fees,increased application fees, fast track fees, NMA fees, FPN, copycharges - like BS, reduce paper trail - electronic decisions ifapplication submitted as electronic. Risks - poorer publicservice.Better position to lever in grant finance. Uncertainty for staff.Yes - needs to be properly organised and managed.Yes, benefiting community/groups, wider benefits in terms ofbuilding blocks, small projects, bigger projects. Built heritage -community projects also accounting for above.Yes. continued from above - and your out. Stop wastingour time! Extra fees for retrospective apps.