The Scottish Government

Listen

ISBN 0 7559 6017 3 (Web only publication)
This document is also available in pdf format (144k)

In attendance :-
Richard Hartland, Head of Development Management, West Lothian Council, and Current Chair of the Society of Directors of Planning. Chairman of the Steering Group
Petra Biberbach, Executive Director of Planning Aid for Scotland.
Eleanor McAllister, Managing Director of Clydebank Re-built Ltd.
Alasdair McKinlay, Head of Community Engagement Team, Communities Scotland.
Alistair Stark, Vice-convenor of RTPI in Scotland, and trained mediator).
Pennie Taylor, Freelance journalist, broadcaster and specialist communication consultant.
Harald Tobermann, Chair of Pilrig Residents Association.
Allan Lundmark, Director of Homes for Scotland.
Siobhan Ennis, Scottish Executive Planning Division.
Jane Macrory, Senior Planner, Scottish Executive Planning Division 2.
Mike Culshaw, Deputy Chief Reporter, Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit.

Apologies received from :-
Ann Coleman, Chair of Greengairs Action Group.
Julie Hamilton, Planning Policy Manager, Clackmannanshire Council.
Stephen Boyd, STUC

Background

This was the first meeting of the Steering Group that had been asked by Ministers to take forward work on the development of a Planning Advice Note on Community Engagement. This PAN is one of a package of measures supporting the modernisation of the planning system.

Following a welcome by the Chairman, Richard Hartland, and introductions, there was a constructive discussion on what members of the steering group thought was the aim of the PAN and what the end product should contain. The main points raised in discussion are noted below and have been categorised under general headings for ease.

General points

Planning is at the heart of society and impacts on many issues. Planning is perceived to interfere with individual freedom but is required for the greater good of society. However, the view was also expressed that planning is more about providing what the state - in the form of central and local government - needs than reflecting what communities want. There is a tendency for planning to consult on pre-conceived ideas.

There is a balance to be struck between managing change and managing expectation. The PAN has to make clear that there can be competing objectives and that it is important to achieve a balance.

There will be an increasing dominance of larger scale projects - including large regeneration zones. Communities may not live in these areas but the developments will have an impact - so how can people best be engaged in the process? There is a need for longer term engagement with communities - from master planning stage, through the development of infrastructure, to the development on the ground. Planning authorities need to provide an enabling role to help people understand the process.

Challenges within the current system

Too many people feel dissatisfied with the planning system and there is perceived to be a lack of trust between those involved - planners, communities and developers. The PAN should aim to rebuild trust in involvement in the planning system and should encourage practical participation.

Planning is process driven and is felt to be technical, complicated, confusing and inaccessible. This makes it hard to engage people and for them to see how land use planning is relevant to their circumstances. The adversarial nature of the current system is a also concern - both in terms of being off-putting to communities, and the lack of resources available to them for their own representation. While effective engagement may not result in fewer appeals, it was hoped that all parties would be better informed.

It was also important to move away from the idea of planning gain - where communities benefit from an offshoot to the development (eg a new community hall in a housing development), to one of planning necessity such as infrastructure essential for the development.

Culture Change

The modernisation measures are founded on the requirement for a culture change in planning. It was acknowledged that there is some good work and commitment to build on. An example was given of the planners who volunteer for Planning Aid for Scotland who engage with communities on their own time, and local authority planners who work with community groups in the evenings and weekends.

Planners are usually happy to help but often non-planning matters, such as roads can cause problems. Planners should therefore be encouraged to develop other areas of expertise, and gain a better understanding of the economics an forward planning needs of the development industry. Culture change is also required from elected members and community groups.

What makes effective engagement?

Ideally, engagement should take place as early in the planning process as possible - this might help alleviate some problems around the adversarial nature of the system. It was recognised however, that while there were issues around commercial confidentiality in involving communities ahead of application stage, it would be helpful to hold early general discussions.

One of the main issues of concern for communities, and one that can lead to a mistrust of the system, is not being kept informed about the progress of a development, especially with some of the larger scale projects which can take many years to complete. Communities also feel their views have not been taken into account, or they are not being given adequate explanation of procedures and the reasoning behind decisions taken.. Keeping communities informed about what was happening and providing feedback on decision making was vital.

Information (not just planning) provided needs to be simple, clear and avoid jargon. But it is also acknowledged that in addition to providing information, there is an educational aspect to getting people involved. Ideally, the engagement process should be a continuous one. Local media will have a role to play in helping to raise awareness of planning and encourage engagement.

The scale of engagement, and the techniques to be applied, have to be appropriate to the issue under consideration. For instance, a consultation on a development plan would apply a variety of methods and involve more (and different) people and groups than one for a small housing development. Consensus building is important and the role of mediation was also touched upon.

The PAN should include advice on enforcement issues and how communities can work in partnership with local authorities to monitor development on the ground. Local authorities need to develop a seamless and corporate service so that staff, in carrying out their day to day duties, can assist in identifying where enforcement measures may be required. The PAN should also address the issue of community led development

Links with other community networks

It is recognised that local authorities and other public service providers are already working and engaging with communities, and in innovative ways - for example local community planning networks. As these networks involve local people in shaping their communities and the provision of public services, there is a natural link between these networks and planning that the PAN should seek to encourage. It was suggested that future funding mechanisms for local public services could flow from the community planning process and that it would therefore be important for land use planning to be a part of this.

In addition to community planning networks, there are examples of local authorities engaging with a number of other groups, including community councils and built environment interest groups.

Measuring success - monitoring and evaluation

The PAN, and the inclusion measures in the modernisation package, should be monitored and evaluated to see whether the new proposals are working and what effect they are having on community perception of, and involvement in, planning. It was suggested that this might become a performance measure under best value, or that planning authorities might consider seeking accreditation with a recognised standard such as Charter Mark, a national standard for customer service in the public sector.

Examples of Good Practice

Visioning - allowing people to see how their community might look - was cited as a good technique for community engagement, with particular reference to the Dutch example.

Members of the group were encouraged to make the Executive aware of any examples of good practice that might feature in the PAN. Agreement was reached for the Executive to send the letter inviting examples of good practice to planning authorities, community councils, and other community, businesses and environmental groups.

Resources

There would be resource implications arising from implementing the new inclusion measures. It was acknowledged that community engagement could be expensive so the PAN needed to provide advice that would allow planning authorities, communities and developers to be involved within acceptable resource limits. Communities can experience difficulty in accessing resources, including funds, although sources were available.

Training on community engagement would be required. The Planning Development Budget was available to assist planning staff and elected members in their engagement with both communities and business.

The idea of a web-based PAN was well received as it would mean that the information could be updated to reflect new, practical examples of involvement and importantly, contain up to date information on resources and training.

Action Points

Subject to comments made during the meeting, the format and content of the PAN proposed would provide a starting point for the production of a draft. Members of the group were invited to provide any further comments they had to the Executive.

It was proposed that a day should be set aside for the next meeting, if possible, to go through the detail of the draft PAN. Richard Hartland offered to host the meeting at council offices in Linlithgow. Availability for dates in April would be canvassed.

Scottish Executive
February 2006