Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Logo
Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Ouvert | En cours - juillet 2012 | Dernière modification - Aujourd'hui

PSF issues

Jon Allinson, modifié il y a 10 années.

PSF issues

Enthusiast Publications: 32 Date d'inscription: 19/10/11 Publications Récentes

We are finalising the filling out of the PSF returns, and have come across a conumdrum.

Following an agreed extension of time we determined a Q13 application within the quarter we are returning . We filled this out in the PS1 part of the return as a determined extension of time app, but there is no such area to fill this out in the Q13 part of the PS2.

Consequently this is flagging up an error in the return. The guidance notes dont seem to provide any guidance in this area.

Has anybody else had this issue?

 

planing applications performance
Former Member, modifié il y a 10 années.

PSF issues

This is interesting Jon.  My guess is that it is because the modifications to the PS returns have been made to facilitate the capture of performance data for majors and therefore, although its perfectly good practice to agree an extension of time for a non major app (1-9 dwellings in Q13) it is probably more unusual and not "of the moment" in relation to the designation criteria. 

Jon Allinson, modifié il y a 10 années.

PSF issues

Enthusiast Publications: 32 Date d'inscription: 19/10/11 Publications Récentes

Phillipa,

That was our view also. However in the list of exclusions in the guidance notes for these new arrangements provided by DCLG, it does not list any exclusions for agreed extensions of time and as such one, would assume that all should be counted. With such big ramifications for getting it wrong, we dont want to get it wrong.

Possibly an error in the guidance note production?