online applications data - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Totally agree with you. We have a marked difference between the numbers of valid on submission postal forms and online forms. Likewise the additional workload caused by the collation, resubmissions and printing, not to mention time spent talking people through the online process and resolving their problems, is definately detrimental to efficient processing. We are also now experiencing further problems over file size of submitted documents which require our scanning team to resolve (on one occassion we had to involve our DMS supplier who worked through the night to help us out!). Finally we are getting increasing complaints relating to Data Protection so ensuring personal details are removed adds yet more time to the process. In short it is more work for DC admin, DC officers, Records(scanning team) and performance and support team. I accept things should improve in the long run but we have a very long way to go.

Not discounting the need to provide upfront advice and guidance on whether a Planning Application is required in the first place; perhaps through an Expert System see http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/parsol Applicants/Agents require clear guidance on what constitutes a good ‘electronic’ planning application - in many cases they are as ‘green’ to working electronically as perhaps an LPA maybe; as such, may be unwittingly, and avoidably, making life harder for the LPA to process an ‘electronic’ planning application. PARSOL Planning has recently published the ‘Electronic Application and Consultation Guidance Paper’ available for download from the Planning Portal PARSOL Web Pages http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/parsol providing practical guidance on getting the basics right from the outset, e.g. - maximum file sizes [recommended 25M]; - file naming conventions [RIBA/Plain English]; - file formats [recommended PDF]; - drawing orientation; - scanning resolution [recommended 200 dpi]; - use of scale bars and key dimensions, etc. This guidance also provides further advice on how an LPA can realise the benefits, locked-up in an ‘electronic’ planning application, through effective electronic consultation with their consultees. A simple wall poster has been developed to capture the essence of the advice, which will shortly be sent to every LPA; an electronic version has been attached with this posting for your convenience.

I would like to give Torbay's opinion on the online application system. Applications are validated within 3 days, regardless of whether the application originated online or via the postal system. The fact that you are validating applications in 18 days would raise concerns for me and I would look at your Business Processes. This means that by the time the application has been advertised, it is nearly 40 days old, leaving typically just 16 days for the officer to come to a recommendation and issue a decision notice? What about those which go to Committee? Also, why is there such a massive difference in time taken to validate online applications when compared to postal applications? I can’t really see the point in the amount of withdrawn applications as a topic of debate. Surely, a more relevant one is the amount of invalid applications being received. For the period from 1st October 2005 to 30th September, invalid online applications were running at around 18%, compared with 15.3% for Postal. I accept the fact that online applications are over 2.5% above the Postal invalid rate, however, when we are dealing with a massive cultural change to the way that the application submission system is being delivered; I think it’s just a circumstance. The inefficient part of the system is that no-one seems to have a truly integrated DMS with their back office system. We seem to face more problems getting the two vendors to work together and provided a ‘One Stop Solution’ solution than anything else. I personally think that the Planning Portal have been an excellent resource, they have gone out of their way to help us drive up the amount of online applications by holding workshops, producing literature and even talking to and visiting our Agents.

Wayne, I would guess that Richard is talking about the time taken by his applicants to submit the additional information required to render their application valid. I.e. he is not saying that it takes his team 18 days to process them... Rutland has also seen a marked decline in the quality of data submitted with online applications.

I have read with interest the comments made on the receipt and processing of online planning applications and the experiences of local planning authorities (LPAs). Over the past few years, planning has undergone significant technical change with innovative online services now available for citizens and business users across England & Wales. The focus of improvements until now has been on making services more customer focused and on utilising the benefits IT can bring. Every LPA in England and Wales can now receive planning applications via the Planning Portal and as a result we are experiencing a steady increase in the usage and take-up of the service with more than 3500 applications passing through the Planning Portal last month (October). We should all be proud of this achievement, but inevitably it has not been made without overcoming obstacles. During the roll-out of the service we learned many vital lessons and gained a valuable understanding of the difficulties faced by LPAs when receiving and processing applications online. To help to overcome some of the more common issues encountered by users (including problems with incomplete plans which lack a scale bar or dimensions) we have held dozens of agent forums and workshops across the country, to almost universally positive feedback. Most planning professionals (agents) quickly identify with the business benefits that result from process changes they need to adopt to use the online service and are happy to make the switch, liaising with their LPA to resolve any problems if necessary. The majority of LPAs have reported to us that following workshops although the number of online applications received rises only gradually, the quality of applications is much improved with fewer incomplete applications being submitted. A problem discussed in this forum concerns applications received directly from citizens without the benefit of assistance from an agent or pre-application advice from the local planning office. With the most common error being a lack of supporting documents and plans. I do not believe that this is a fault with the electronic system as LPAs report the same issue with paper submissions. That said, the inclusion of mandatory check-lists for local and national supplementary information within the forthcoming (1App) Standard National Application Form should fix this problem. Similarly regarding the Data Protection issues - 1App is being configured in such a way as to easily enable the publication of applications with the relevant fields omitted. The Portal team see it as essential that we build on our already excellent relationships with authorities and have recently run a series of forums specifically for planning administrators. The feedback we have received has improved our understanding of the problems faced by some LPAs and allowed us to target the necessary help to overcome them. For example LPA staff stress in order to meet our joint e-Planning aims authorities must make all their internal IT systems fully inter-operable, from development control back-office to document management systems and beyond, to consultees. Following on from our recent take-over of the PARSOL e-Consultation work, we are now working with both English Heritage and the Environment Agency to continue the enablement of the entire process. Since the launch of the Planning Portal in 2002, the service has evolved and will continue to change based upon LPA and user feedback. More than 130,000 individuals use the Portal every month now and by working together we can all continue to tackle the major changes required to deliver world-class planning services. If you have any comments or queries, please do not hesitate to contact myself, our Support team (0117 372 8200 etc) or your Regional Account Manager ( http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/government/en/1115312331960.html ).

Thank you all for your thoughts. It hadn't been my intention to denigrate the portal and their ilk, nor to question the likelihood that the bulk of interactions will ultimately be electronic. To recap, some of the elements proposed in the PDG review will create more pressure to drive up online submissions. I suppose I was interested to see if I had misread the business case. From our experience, online applications take marginally more time/money process than others. The risk is that because it is linked to PDG, we put our critical faculties on hold and just set out to drive up online applications. Is the phrase “self-fulfilling prophesy” appropriate ? The nearest I’ve seen to a good business case is in authorities who have been able to end-to-end the paperless handling process. However, I guess authorities willing / able to do this are in the minority. Should we really obey rule 31 and “actively promote the use of electronic channels over paper-based methods to applicants” ? Can someone tell me what’s in it for us ?

PARSOL Electronic Application and Consultation Guidance Check Sheet, V1.0, see www.planningportal.gov.uk/parsol Rule 31: The LPA shall actively promote the use of Electronic Channels over paper-based methods to both Applicants/Agents and Statutory Consultees alike This rule was devised primarily to expedite the publication of planning applications on LPA websites. Anecdotally, some local authority scanning functions carry a 2 to 3 day lead-time, sometimes more; therefore, encouraging the applicant/agent to submit an application electronically would save the LPA both scanning effort and publication lead-time; thus, enabling the LPA to ‘electronically’ request advice from their Statutory Consultees sooner - consequently, initiating the 21 days response time sooner. Rule 37: The LPA shall ensure that the Electronic Planning Application (regardless of source, i.e. Online, Offline, paper-based) is Quality Assured from the Online Planning Register before issuing a Consultation Notification to Statutory Consultees The rule prevents an LPA from issuing a electronic request (e.g. email) for advice before first ensuring that the planning application is both published, and is of sufficient quality, so as to enable a Statutory Consultee to consider the case from the LPA’s Online Planning Register. What is in it for LPA’s? The introduction of the forthcoming (1App) Standard Planning Application Form is expected to result in a stepped increase in the number of applications submitted electronically. LPAs should prepare for this eventuality, by fully embracing end-to-end e-Planning through effective, efficient, electronic consultation with their Statutory Consultees. At present, Statutory Consultess have the right to request paper-copies of the full application (costs borne by the LPA), and are likely to do so unless timely, high quality, access to planning applications is made available from the LPA’s Online Planning Register.