Structures for delivering the Development Management Service - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Structures for delivering the Development Management Service
We are starting a piece of work to look at options for delivering our Development Management service. Our current structure has 3 area based teams, a major schemes team, and an Enforcement team. The teams each have a Team Manager and planning officers on a range of scales. Planning applications and related planning work is allocated to the teams as its received, and this is underpinned by a weekly allocation meeting to iron out any peaks and troughs.
All of these teams are supported by a single Technical Support/Admin Team which supports both the DM and Building Control functions.
In the past we have had some variations on this approach, i.e. more area based teams, specialist teams e.g. Householders, and technical/admin support devolved to the teams.
If anyone has a particular model they think is the best way to do it and you would like to share the details, that would be appreciated.
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.
RE: Structures for delivering the Development Management Service
Bryan
I note that there hasn`t been a response, and I guess its one of those questions which is difficult to answer. What works for a does not always work for b. If truth be known the real answer is probably `what works best for the customer` ! Considerations towards that `goal` should include ` speed of validation` , access to officers, balance of workloads, enough enforcement/compliance resources, and ability to deliver major infrastructure projects both public and private.
Deliver those and you deliver a `development management` service
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.
RE: Structures for delivering the Development Management Service
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.
RE: Structures for delivering the Development Management Service
Gilian
I don`t disagree. The problem is the first thing to be cut is the training budget, and inexperienced officers will then have to turn to their `seniors` for advice which often merely perpetuates their seniors own mistakes. There is no substitute for challenging the way you work/operate, by getting an `outsider` to look in at processes procedures and structures. The second issue of `involving everyone ` is key to change management but, not everyone wants to be involved and often thay have their own agendas or are being asked to leave their comfort zones.
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.
RE: Structures for delivering the Development Management Service
They can of course come to 'free' training from the PAS or possibly take advanctage of Peer review. They can also sign up to the quality framework http://www.pas.gov.uk/planning-quality-framework. which will give a better understanding of the service and areas for improvement.
I think it is a better option to have those in the organisation take a critical look at their own procedures to suggest improvement rather than have a consultant come parachuting in and tell them how it is best done. You say not everyone wants to be involved- it is the role of the manager to make sure that they are and that their views are valued. If the change is from within then it will be better implemented and long lasting The tricky element is making sure that there is the time and space to undertake such change.
Former Member, modified 9 Years ago.
RE: Structures for delivering the Development Management Service
Chris and Gillian, thanks for the comments. I have also done some research amongst other councils we work with, and I think the answer to the question ‘what’s the best way to structure a DM service’ is that it all depends. i.e. it depends on factors such as the type of work that needs to be done, the skills and experience of those providing the service, and the political/committee structures. This means there is never going to be a perfect model that suits every situation. My sense is also that councils are not sat back with the ‘we have always done it this way’ attitude and they and looking at structuring the service in a way that reflects what’s happening in their patch.
Re Chris’s and Gillian’s comments, whilst I can understand that the design needs meet the needs of the customer, I wonder if this is customer in the widest sense, i.e. the citizen who is affected by what gets built and how it operates. Or the direct customer, i.e. the customer who by paying application fees pays for the service. My feeling is that these customers might have different answers to the ‘what works best’ question.