ECC Annual Monitoring Report on Statement of Community Involvement April 2010-March 2011
Essex County Council: Minerals & Waste Planning
Progress against SCI Action Plan 2010– 2011as at March 2012
(Action taken/to be taken subsequently shown in italics)
Section 1.0: Overview of SCI AMR 2010-2011This progress report expands the high level AMR report on the SCI published in December 2011 and available to view at then Minerals & Waste Planning team>Planning policy>Annual Monitoring Report>AMR 2010-11. It also includes details of amendments to the recommendations to be taken into account for the 2011-2012 report plus any subsequent actions taken up to the end of March 2012.
It was originally intended to review and update the Statement of Community Involvement during 2010-2011 in light of the findings of the Killian Pretty Review. However, this proved to be unrealistic following the announcement of major changes to planning legislation to be implemented by the new Coalition Government elected in May 2010, with the new Localism Bill not expected to be enacted until the autumn of 2011. The existing Statement of Community Involvement adopted in October 2009 therefore continues as it stands, with a review to take place in 2012-13 following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework in spring 2012.
However, continuous progress was made in implementing the procedures set out in the Statement of Community Involvement and its ongoing Action Plan and Equality Impact Assessment (see Section 2 below) during the rollout of the Minerals and Waste Development Framework during 2010-2011. Two public consultations took place during the period:
a)The Waste Development Document Issues & Options Consultation between 7 October 2010 and 2 December 2010 (see 1.1 below)
b)The Minerals Development Document Preferred Approach Consultation between 9 December 2010 and 17 February 2011 (see 1.2 below).
Progress against the Development Management aspects of the SCI also moved along steadily during 2010-2011 (see 1.3 below), with continued implementation and monitoring against recommendations made in earlier Action Plans. However, bigger changes are on the horizon for subsequent years, with the long-awaited arrival of a new case management system during 2011-2012. This is due to go live for end-users during 2012-2013. The biggest change arising from this will be that all applications, site plans, maps etc will be available to view electronically only, not just at the usual venues of DBC offices, Essex libraries and County Hall but also online via .
1.1 Waste Development Document (WDD) Issues & Options Consultation
Because the Waste Development Document is a joint production with Southend-on-Sea Borough Council, a Joint Communications Plan had to be agreed in accordance with each authority’s SCI, with the proviso imposed by the Planning Inspectorate that in the case of difference in methodology, the higher specification set out in either SCI would prevail. However, only insignificant points of difference were identified between the two SCIs, and we were able to produce and implement a Joint Consultation Strategy for the consultation.
The techniques below were agreed as the preferred techniques for each stage of consultation for the Waste Development Documents in the Statements of Community Involvement for both Essex County Council and Southend Borough Council, and the Consultation Strategy was drawn up accordingly:
Issues & Options Stage (inc Preferred Approach Step) (Reg 25)
Statutory requirements are shown in regular font; additional techniques in italics
No / Technique / ECC SCI / SBC SCI / Remarks
1 / Direct consultation with Specific, General & Other Consultees (inc Preferred Approach stage)...as appropriate / / / SBC to adopt DNN on proposed sites to meet higher specification
2 / Inspection copies at specified locations / / / County Hall; SBC Civic Centre; Essex DBC offices; all public libraries
3 / Publish documents/consultation response forms on website / / / Links from ECC/SBC websites to joint consultation website
4 / Response forms available in hard copy and electronically / /
5 / Publication of newsletters, leaflets, flyers as appropriate.
Information pack (where required) /
/ / JCS will meet higher specification.
6 / Parish/ward meetings (where required) / /
7 / Press release + newspaper notice / / / Press releases to be identical
8 / Area Forums/workshops (where required) / /
9 / Feedback form to assess effectiveness of engagement activity / /
It was possible to make significant economies by running a joint consultation, with particular savings in the areas of printing and publication of public notices, and in reducing the use of consultants to provide workshops. Under sections 4.8 and 11.1 of the ECC SCI, we undertake to review the cost-effectiveness of consultation techniques above the statutory minimum, and a major advance was made in reducing the cost of producing hard copy documents. Previously, all parish and town councils (PTCs) had received hard-copy consultation documents; when consulted before the start of the WDD I&0 consultation, only 13% of parishes still required hard copy documents. The remainder were happy with either a CD containing all the documents, a hard copy summary plus CD or a link to the documents via the ECC website. All PTCs with local proposed sites will continue to receive hard copy documents however, plus the relevant extract from the appendices, where produced.
Thirteen roadshows were held in main libraries throughout the consultation area on a variety of dates and each of these sessions ran from 1030 until 1900 to enable the maximum number of attendees to visit, including the time-limited. However, attendance at these was relatively low (in the main because the WDD Issues & Options paper did not include information on proposed sites and was therefore a less controversial document), and it was agreed that future consultations would move towards drop-in sessions targeted towards those locations close to proposed sites.
Five workshops were also held in Colchester, Brentwood, Chelmsford, Braintree and Southend during the consultation period. Feedback from workshops held during the previous MDD consultation had identified that the use of a firm of consultants as facilitators had not represented great value for money because of the facilitators’ lack of knowledge of the area and contents of the Development Document. It was therefore decided to train ECC and SBC staff as facilitators, and this proved both cost-effective and helpful for the longer-term. We were also supported by the Planning Advisory Service (PAS), which was willing to part-fund the cost of an independent chair for all the workshops,providing the credibility of an impartial overview plus continuity between workshop sessions. Workshops provided a good forum for a cross-section of those interested in the WDD to exchange views in a non-confrontational environment, and to build up a balanced picture of waste issues. It was also agreed to use members of the Essex Citizens’ Panel to add value to the workshops from an independent perspective.
The ECC newsletter to all PTCs, Making the Links, was used to keep local communities updated on progress with the consultation, and PTCs were encouraged to include the information provided in their own parish newsletters, and to display posters and flyers on their local community noticeboards. This proved an effective and low-cost method of communication.
1.2 Minerals Development Document (MDD) Preferred Approach Consultation
Unlike the WDD, the MDD is not a joint document. However, we were able to build upon lessons learnt from the WDD consultation (see 1.1 above) in planning the consultation strategy for the MDD, and further reductions in printing costs were achieved in consultation with PTCs, with only 5% of those without local sites still opting for hard copy documents.
As mentionedin 1.1 above, drop-in sessions targeting those areas close to proposed minerals sites were set up in 18 locations at a variety of dates and times to accommodate the maximum numbers of attendees in venues close to home. These provided the opportunity for individuals to discuss their concerns on a one to one basis with ECC officers, and to view detailed maps of proposals. Feedback and attendance figures from the drop-in sessions confirmed that this was the best way forward in engaging the public.
Unstaffed information displays were also rotated between main libraries within the county, encouraging members of the public towards the drop-in sessions and the MDD workshops. It has been difficult to gauge exactly how effective these were except by noting the number of leaflets and information packs taken from each location: in Braintree, for example, the displays provided a popular focal point for local residents to collect information about proposals, whereas areas little affected by proposals in the MDD Preferred Approach had low turnover of information packs. It was therefore agreed not to use unstaffed information displays for the forthcoming 2011-2012 consultations, but to review how these might be used in a more focussed way in future.
Three workshops were held during the consultation period at Colchester, Chelmsford and Braintree, comprising one morning, one afternoon and one evening session to encourage maximum participation. Following on from the WDD consultation, ECC facilitators were used throughout, together with the PAS independent chair and Essex Citizens’ Panellists once again, and feedback from the workshops indicated that these were felt to be a useful element of the consultation process. Once again, Making the Links and the PTC network were used to disperse information about the consultation at a very low cost.
1.3 Development Management Issues
Progress against the Development Management aspects of the SCI continued steadily during 2010-2011, with continued implementation and monitoring against recommendations made in earlier Action Plans. The biggest change was a shift in customer satisfaction monitoring: the existing system had resulted in consultation fatigue amongst frequent applicants, and so a new system of online satisfaction monitoring was introduced by the end of 2010-2011. This invited both applicants and consultees (including DNN consultees) to complete online satisfaction surveys, making the process both more inclusive and more cost-effective as it reduced the costs of hard copy consultation and postage, and results were readily available on the system.
However, bigger changes are on the horizon for subsequent years, with the long-awaited arrival of a new case management system (see Recommendation 2 below) during 2011-2012. This is due to go live for end-users during 2012-2013. The biggest change arising from this will be that all applications, site plans, maps etc will be available to view electronically only. While this brings us in line with Essex District & Borough Councils (DBCs) who have been e-enabled in this way for several years, the process will need careful management and co-operation between ECC, DBCs and libraries throughout the county to ensure that the commitments we make in the SCI can still be fulfilled.
1.4 Progress against Recommendations 2010-2011 and Amendments to these for 2011-2012
Ongoing monitoring of the SCI is carried out each year as set out in Table 17 of the Adopted SCI. Progress against the following recommendations identified as key actions from the 2009-2010 AMR on the SCI is as follows, and amendments put forward for 2011-2012 are included in italics:
Recommendation / Progress during 2010-2011; subsequent progress is shown in italics
Recommendation 1: that monitoring of customer satisfaction continue via questionnaire feedback forms for policy documents, and that twice yearly satisfaction monitoring for planning applications be re-introduced by March 2011.
Updated for 2011/12 to read:
Recommendation 1: that a way be identified to review respondees to the new satisfaction monitoring process for Development Management to evidence that the seldom heard are being engaged.
Recommendation 1A: that some form of monitoring be introduced for any future Policy drop-in sessions to establish a) whether these are reaching the seldom heard and b) whether these are achieving the purpose intended (satisfaction monitoring). This may also be appropriate for some DM awareness briefing sessions. /
- Monitoring of satisfaction with the policy consultation process continues to be included automatically via the consultation portal. Issues have been dealt with on an ad hoc basis as they arise, and mostly concerned temporary difficulties with accessing the portal or a lack of understanding with the process. We are working continuously to make online consultation more user-friendly: use of the online facility is increasing with each successive consultation, and queries/complaints are correspondingly decreasing each time.
- Feedback from consultation workshops was resoundingly positive, with only a handful of attendees awarding a mark below the midpoint. The great majority of attendees had found the workshops enjoyable, interesting and informative.
- Customer satisfaction with the planning application process was done by providing a link to the satisfaction monitoring form on all correspondence sent out, rather than enclosing a hard copy form with letters as previously, which tended to cause consultation fatigue amongst frequent applicants. There are future plans to introduce random sampling once the new case management system is in place.
- In late 2011-2012, a suggestion was received from the ContactEssex team that they might be able to carry out both types of monitoring for MWP, and this possibility is being explored.
Recommendation 2: that online response to policy consultations continue to be encouraged pro-actively and that an online case management system for planning applications be pursued even more vigorously.
Updated for 2011/12 to read:
Recommendation 2: that in future policy consultations, respondees continue to be actively encouraged to use online response forms as the cheapest, fastest and most interactive method, also reducing admin time required to enter data. /
- All information about the consultations, both online and in hard copy, is pro-active in encouraging consultees to respond online, on the basis that it is the cheapest and quickest method of response. As stated above, the number of respondees using the online portal is increasing steadily with each consultation.
- The business case for the case management system was approved during 2010-2011, and went out for tender in February 2011. The contract was then signed in June 2011 and the new system went live in November 2011, with availability to end-users projected for early in 2012-2013.
- PTCs were surveyed on preferred format for documents for the two policy consultations during 2010-2011. There was a very substantial decrease during the year in those still requiring hard copy documents, and a corresponding increase in those willing to receive electronic consultation documents. The changeover to electronic versions did not affect response rates, and no complaints were received about this issue. In fact, responses to the MDD Preferred Approach were higher than those to the earlier MDD Issues & Options paper of 2009 (an increase of 58.8%).
- The drive to reduce hard copy documents and responses continues for both teams in MWP. However, the policy team will continue to offer limited hard copy documents, at least until the review of the SCI takes place in 2012/13, whereas the DM team will not issue hard copies once the case management system is in place, but will still accept hard copy responses while encouraging respondees towards the online system.
Recommendation 3: that tracking information continue to be included on application checklists to ensure effectiveness of pre-application discussion can be monitored/reported and substantiated when required.
Updated for 2011/12 to read:
Recommendation 3: that tracking information continues to be included on application checklists to facilitate monitoring of pre-application discussion and reporting of same. /
- Ongoing. Tracking information was first included in 2009, and will continue to be monitored via the new case management system, with a link to the customer satisfaction process.
- Since the publication of the Localism Act in 2011, it is a requirement that developers carry out public consultation on certain proposed development, publicizing the proposal in such a manner as to bring the proposal to the attention of the majority of those living or occupying premises in the vicinity. This strengthens the validity of pre-application discussion, in that previously planners may have recommended a pre-application public involvement programme, but had no legal recourse to ensure that this happened.
Recommendation 4: that no change be made to the radius for Direct Neighbour Notification at the moment (250m for minerals & waste applications, adjacent properties for CC development), but to monitor feedback from both policy consultations and planning applications to ensure the radius is still regarded as generally satisfactory.
Updated for 2011/12 to read:
Recommendation 4: No change to our existing standard in the current economic climate as a) this is more generous than for neighbouring authorities and b) we believe DNN consultation on both policy documents and planning applications elicits a response from a good cross-section of the public, including the seldom heard, and represents continuing good value for money. Monitoring will continue. /
- Ongoing. Attendees at policy drop-in sessions often query the 250m consultation radius for minerals & waste development, but understand that current economic constraints preclude any extension of the 250m radius at the present time.
Recommendation 5: that ECC staff be trained to facilitate future workshops and thereby use their greater knowledge of the subject to inform the debate, and also achieve economies by eliminating the need to use consultants to provide the service.
Updated for 2011/12 to read:
Complete. No current further action identified. /
- A large group of ECC staff from across SEE were trained as facilitators in the autumn of 2010, and the quality of workshops has improved thereafter, as evidenced by workshop feedback forms.
Recommendation 6: that the SCI be reviewed and updated to take on board changes to planning legislation and the removal of the regional planning body plus any modifications needed as a result of reduced government funding etc.