Development Management Performance Update - Fq1 2025/26
Argyll and Bute Council · 16 September 2025
Back to Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee — 16 September 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Classification: OFFICIAL ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL PPSL Committee Development & Economic Growth 16th September 2025 Development Management Performance Update – FQ1 2025/26 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 This report provides an update on the performance of the Development Management Service for the reporting period FQ1 2025/26. 1.2 The attached document Appendix 1 provides an overview of the current demands upon the Development Management Service, its output during this period, the handling of the current backlog of casework, and the average time taken to determine planning applications. 2.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 It is recommended that PPSL: (a) Review and agree the content of the report. 3.0 DETAIL & BACKGROUND 3.1 The performance of the Council’s Development Management Service has been significantly impacted by the legacy effect of the Covid Pandemic upon interruption to workflow and a subsequent increase in demand for regulatory activity relating to new development. This situation has been exacerbated by the Service having previously been down-sized in response to the longer-term wider financial pressures facing the Council combined with a number of long-term vacancies that proved extremely difficult to fill as a result of a national shortage of planning professionals. The determination of planning applications has also been impacted by the uncertainty created by a changing planning policy backdrop with the Scottish Government’s adoption of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) in February 2023 with minimal transition arrangements having had a noticeable adverse impact on FQ4 2022/23 output as a result of a significant volume of casework requiring to be reassessed prior to its determination. The cumulative effect of these extraordinary pressures has given rise to a significant backlog of planning casework that continues to impact upon the ability of the Council to deliver the Development Management Service in an efficient and effective manner at this time, and impacts upon customer service. At FQ4 2022/23 the backlog of applications amounted to approximately 375 formal applications and 175 pre-application enquiries.
Page 2
Classification: OFFICIAL 3.2 An Improvement Action Plan (IAP) was prepared in early 2023 in response to the significant decrease in performance and wider issues impacting upon the resourcing of the service and its interactions with customers. The implementation of the IAP has ensured the delivery of additional capacity within the Development Management Service and along with this improvement initially in terms of output and more latterly improving trends are also now able to be identified in relation to the making of timely determinations. Building upon the foundation of the IAP, the Development Management Service Plan and Development Management Charter approved by PPSL on 18th September 2024 set out updated performance targets for the Service. These include a wider range of measures that seek to demonstrate the delivery of individual elements of the IAP and in addition to timeliness include measures which can be utilised to measure customer satisfaction, and staff welfare. 3.3 DEMAND: The Development Management Service receive approximately 2000 planning and related application case work items on an annual basis. The Development Management Service is resourced with the expectation that demand will be relatively constant and steady throughout the year. Whilst the volume of new submissions decreased by approximately 10% during 2020/21 they had returned to and exceeded pre-pandemic levels during 2021/22. Submission rates have subsequently been maintained at a high level and during 2022/23 were 5% up on pre-pandemic levels. Appendix 1, Sheet 1 shows that whilst submission rates continued to show an increase in demand during FQ1 2025/26 this has increased slightly from the previous reporting period. 3.4 During FQ1 2025/26 the DM Service has operated with 2 vacant posts in addition to impacts arising from unplanned absence, including the impact of work related stress. In an effort to make further inroads in the backlog of casework, one agency staff member has been retained to augment the MAKI team. 3.5 OUTPUT: Reduced availability of professional officer resource within the DM Service during FQ1 has resulted in a notable dip in output compared to previous reporting periods. (Appendix 1, Sheet 2). It is anticipated that productivity will improve once recruitment to vacant posts has been completed although any bounce back is likely to be delayed as a result of the reduced officer availability during the Summer holiday period. 3.6 Notwithstanding the dip in productivity, FQ1 has also seen an increase in the number of invalid submissions, the consequence of this is that determinations have kept pace with the number of applications validated during this period (Appendix 1, Sheet 3). A review of ‘live’ casework has however identified that whilst there has been a slight increase in the number of ‘legacy’ cases which are older than 1 year from validation remain ‘live’ and it is noted that thee have increased from 86 to 90 items during FQ1 (Appendix 1, Sheet 4). Whilst the dip in productivity is as a result of reduced resource availability in the short-term it is a matter which gives some cause for concern in terms of immediate performance but also indicates that the Service has unresolved issues in relation to its resilience which will be closely monitored moving forward.
Page 3
Classification: OFFICIAL 3.7 PRE-APPLICATION ENQUIRIES: Demand for pre-application advice remains high however Pre-application turnover is currently on track. Performance during FQ1 has met demand from new submissions. A commitment has been provided to review and improve the pre-application process, this will include the provision of enhanced information on the Council website to allow a greater proportion of customers to ‘self-serve’; development and roll out of a new pre-application service has been identified as a priority project for 2025. 3.8 ‘HOUSEHOLDER’ DEVELOPMENT: The performance of the Development Management Service is also measured in terms of the time taken to determine applications as it is recognised that failure to provide timely decisions can create uncertainty and be detrimental to the delivery of development across the Council area. Overall ‘time-taken’ measures have been skewed for sometime by the determination of a high volume of older ‘legacy’ applications that have accrued as part of the planning backlog. The increasing proportion of older applications being determined from FQ3 2022/23 onwards is identified in the bar graphs that provide a breakdown of application age within the average time measures (Appendix 1, Sheet 5 and Sheet 6) and demonstrate that ‘legacy’ applications are successfully being targeted for determination. FQ1 has seen 2 of the remaining ‘legacy’ ‘householder’ items determined providing confirmation that the significant improvement to underlying performance is becoming more evident in the overall average time measures as 2025/26 progresses. 3.9 The determination of ‘legacy’ applications for the time being does however continue to have adverse consequences for overall average time performance measures as the determination of a relatively small number of older applications significantly impacts upon these KPIs. This is particularly evident again within the ‘householder’ average time measure (Appendix 1, Sheet 5) where despite 95% of all householder determinations being determined in an average time of 8.1 weeks this measure is significantly impacted by the determination of just 2 older applications that have cumulatively added 2.3 weeks to the average time period for determination of this KPI. The overall reduction in ‘legacy’ items has however allowed for improvement of the headline KPI from 14.2 weeks in FQ 4 2024/25 to 10.1 weeks in FQ1 2025/26. It is also highlighted that this position relates to ‘raw’ data and does not factor in delays which have arisen as a result of matters outwith the control of the Council, or applications that have been subject to processing agreements. During FQ1 the Council determined a number of legacy applications which have impacted on the raw data relating to the average time period, including items that were delayed largely due to matters outwith the control of the Council. Whilst the data sets are not directly comparable it is still helpful to reference the SG Returns as a benchmark. In this respect the national average for householder applications at FQ2 2024/25 was 8.7 weeks. 3.10 ‘LOCAL’ DEVELOPMENT: The determination of ‘legacy’ applications had a similar impact upon the average time taken measure applied to all other ‘local’ planning applications (Appendix 1, Sheet 6) where the determination of 15 ‘legacy’ applications during FQ1 cumulatively added 9.8 weeks to an average time measure that reports on the determination of 128 applications in total. During FQ1 88% of all other ‘local’ applications determined were less than 1 year old at
Page 4
Classification: OFFICIAL the time of their determination and were determined in an average of 17.9 weeks (previously 86% in 15.6 weeks at FQ4 2024/25). 63% of the total were less than 6 months old and determined in 10.2 weeks on average (previously 75% in 12.2 weeks in FQ4 2024/25). The average time taken to determine ‘all other local applications’ has decreased slightly during FQ1 from 26.4 weeks to 26.7 weeks. This slight reduction in performance is caused by the overall dip in productivity which has seen a lower volume of new applications determined during this reporting period. It is again highlighted that this position relates to ‘raw’ data and does not factor in delays which have arisen as a result of matters outwith the control of the Council, or applications that have been subject to processing agreements. During FQ1 the Council determined a number of legacy applications which have impacted on the raw data relating to the average time period, including items that were delayed largely due to matters outwith the control of the Council. Whilst the data sets are not directly comparable it is still helpful to reference the SG Returns as a benchmark. In this respect the national average for local applications (excluding householder) at FQ2 2024/25 was 14.8 weeks. 3.11 CONCLUSION: Whilst it is expected that headline performance on ‘householder’ items should return within target as we progress through 2025/26, the determination of extant ‘legacy’ items will continue to impact on ‘local’ application performance until such time as the remaining 90 items have been determined, and subject to appropriate action which prevents new ‘legacy’ items from accruing. Analysis of the granular data shows that average time periods for determining applications are in general continuing to reduce and that despite headline figures that might raise alarm, the majority of applications continue to be processed within much faster timescales that are showing improvement over time and which within the target of being within 10% of the national average. The slight degradation to performance during FQ1 as a result of reduced availability of officer resource underlines the importance of ensuring that the Development Management Service is adequately resourced as recent improvement in performance has been attained through the reduction in individual officer’s caseloads to manageable levels with limited exceptions. 4.0 IMPLICATIONS 4.1 Policy - None 4.2 Financial - None 4.3 Legal - None 4.4 HR – None 4.5 Customer Service – Requirement to manage customer expectations in the determination planning and related applications 4.6 Risk – Failure to determine planning and related applications in efficient and effective manner would have potential to adversely impact
Page 5
Classification: OFFICIAL upon the local economy, delivery of housing, and health and wellbeing of individuals. 4.7 Climate Change - None 4.8 Fairer Scotland Duty - None 4.9 Equalities - protected characteristics - None 4.10 Consumer Duty - None 4.11 Island Communities - None 4.12 Children’s Rights and Wellbeing - None Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth: Kirsty Flanagan Policy Lead: Cllr Kieron Green 8th September 2025 For further information contact: Peter Bain – 01546 604204 APPENDICES Appendix 1 – FQ1 2025/26 DM performance report