Accessibility and Help
In This Section
Contact The Council
Customer Surveys 2005
Customer Surveys 2005
Customer Surveys 2005 - Action Plan
The Planning Services Section is committed to continually improving the service that we give to our customers.
During 2005 we carried out customer surveys of all users of our service, including applicants, builders and people who objected to applications.We asked all customers for their views and suggestions for improving our service.
Set out below are tables summarising the views received and, where appropriate, our timetable to address concerns and suggestions.
- Part 1 of the survey relates to Development Control (Planning)
- Part 2 of the survey relates to our Building Control services.
If you have any queries regarding the Surveys and the action plan, please contact Planning.
Contact Planning and Building Control
Part 1 - Planning Services
Were there any aspects of our service which did not please or impress you?
| Issue Raised | Comment/Action | Action Date | Responsible Officer |
|---|---|---|---|
| The quality of the downloadable forms is very poor. | Unsure whether this relates to WBC forms or planning forms available from the Planning Portal. WBC forms have been approved by the Plain English Campaign and when downloaded are easy to read. The Government has recently consulted on a standard application form to be applied nationally and this may help avoid complaints in the future. No action required at present. | N/A | - |
| Papers from a recent Development Control Planning Meeting were incomplete and the meeting mishandled an item which was of interest to me. A formal complaint was made at the time. | The complaint in connection with this particular application was dealt with through the Council’s normal complaint procedure and the complainant was satisfied with the results of the investigation. | N/A | - |
| The outcome to allow a greenhouse to be erected in a front garden on a prestigious estate! Application No. WB/05/0395/FULL. | This relates to a retrospective application which was approved by the Development Control Committee after careful consideration. To reduce the impact on the area a condition was imposed requiring screening by shrubs. | N/A | - |
| No action has been taken despite an obvious breach of planning control – the operation of a coach company from a private house involving two luxury coaches and a minibus taxi 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. | This matter has been investigated in the past and no breach of planning control identified. However, recent complaints are being re-investigated. | Complaint being investigated. Report to Committee by end of December 2005. | DCM |
| I rang up a direct line one day and there was no response. When we received the outcome of the application we also had a letter addressed to someone else in the envelope. | We receive a high volume of telephone calls and despatch over 50,000 letters a year. We apologise for the incorrectly addressed letter and will review our telephone diversions and use of voice mail in an effort to improve our response to telephone calls. | Dec 2005 | SSM |
| The basic quality of report/recommendation, giving scant regard to details of objection or relevant policies of structure and local plan. | We are surprised at this comment as all reports to the Development Control Committee include details of objections and the Planning Assessment makes reference to the Local Plan policies that apply. | N/A | - |
| Letters could have been sent to other house owners who were concerned with the proposed development and its impact, i.e. some appeared to have been left out. | The Development Control Section has a neighbour notification policy which identifies those neighbours most likely to be affected by a development. To 'cast the net' to a wider area would have significant cost implications to the Council. | N/A | - |
| The increase in the number of conditions on planning consents, some of which seem to be rather “over the top”. | The number of conditions and informatives requested by statutory consultees such as the Environment Agency has increased to ensure that developments are adequately controlled. However, it is accepted that conditions should only be imposed where strictly required. It is not considered that the number of conditions currently being imposed is excessive but the situation will need to be monitored. | Ongoing | DCM |
| Part ll of the full planning application form is a “pain”. For the more minor schemes, could this be simplified – the Householder Form format would help. | The information required for commercial applications is generally more than for Household applications. All our forms have been approved by the Plain English Campaign. Parts 1 & 2 are incorporated on the same form for ease of use and are accompanied by very full notes. No changes proposed at present. The implementation of a national standard application form may help to simplify matters. | N/A | - |
| I was shocked at the £400 inspection fee at the end of my building project. Maybe the fault of my agent – it would have been nice to have known about it. Perhaps you could make this point to all agents to inform their clients. It is not your fault, but it reflects on you. | This is a Building Control issue. However, all fees are publicised on the Council’s website and are available at the reception in Portland House. | N/A | - |
| A bigger area to look at plans. | We will review the provision of tables in the reception area, although space is unfortunately limited. Improvements have recently been made to the display stands. | - | - |
| Better response, i.e. quicker responses to telephone messages and preliminary enquiries. | It is recognised that shortage of Planning Officers has made it difficult to respond to telephone enquiries and preliminary enquiries as quickly as we would wish. Efforts are being made to recruit Planning Officers. However, there is a current shortage of qualified planners which is making recruitment difficult. | Dec 2005 | ADPS |
| No communication prior to a refusal with no chance to amend plans. | Whilst every effort is made to negotiate with applicants, it is not always possible to amend schemes which are unacceptable, particularly where no pre-application advice has been sought. An applicant is able to submit a second application without a fee to overcome any objections. | N/A | - |
| In some instances, the staff were not prepared to give an indication of the possible outcome of a planning application. The only reply was to make an application, involving the possible waste of time by the applicant. | Shortage of Planning Officers has reduced the time available to provide pre-application advice. We are keen to improve this aspect of our service as soon as resources allow and are currently recruiting additional Planning Officers. | Dec 2005 | ADPS |
| Bearing in mind our concerns regarding the proposed building, we feel three weeks was a long time between the application being withdrawn and us being advised. | This is most unusual and we apologise for the delay. We are usually able to notify people of withdrawn and decided applications within three days. The Development Control Group monitors the time taken to notify people of a particular decision and any future delays beyond the target period of three days will be investigated | Ongoing | SSM |
| Mistaken road layouts in neighbour’s planning application. | Every effort is made to ensure an application is accurate before it is registered and where necessary amended plans are requested. Without further details of this particular case it is difficult to take any further action. | N/A | - |
| Submitted enquiry in February and still waiting for a reply. | As no details are available the matter cannot be investigated. The Planning Section has a code of practice for dealing with letters, which requires a response within ten working days. In view of the considerable delay in response to this case it is surprising that this has not been pursued or brought to the attention of the Assistant Director of Planning Services. | N/A | - |
| Only when the Planning fees were increased, but this is more to do with John Prescott – who will be hearing from me! Again! | Planning fees are set by Central Government. | - | - |
| Time taken to administer applications. | Although the volume of applications has meant delay in registration, we are still able to decide 98% of most types of applications within eight weeks. We are currently looking at ways to reduce the time taken to validate applications. The delays over the summer period have been as a result of a significant increase in the number of major applications at a time when staff have been taking annual holidays. | - | - |
| Discuss an application before you turn it down. | Staff resources do not always permit time to discuss applications with applicants before decision. We are currently trying to recruit additional Planning Officers to assist with the current workload. | Dec 2005 | ADPS |
| Planning office hours not convenient. | Previous surveys showed little support for different opening hours. On request arrangements can be made for the Library to hold Planning Applications for inspection outside normal office hours. In addition we are in the process of increasing the Planning data available on our website. We will consider ways of publicising our website and the arrangement with the Library. The Council is currently considering the implementation of an Electronic Document and Records Management System (EDRMS) which would enable residents to view all planning applications via the web site. | Sept 2006 | ADPS |
| I have only just heard about a phone mast that is proposed for the bottom of Grand Avenue which I would object to if I knew anything about it. | In view of the controversy surrounding this mast the number of residents notified exceeded the requirements of the Code of Practice. | N/A | - |
| There was no attempt by the case worker to explain why my and other objections and planning policies were ignored. By contrast the Planning Committee were excellent and reached the right conclusion. | Reports to the DC Committee always include details of consultations and representations received. Recommendations are based on an objective Planning Assessment. In this case it appears the Development Control Committee overturned an officer recommendation to approve. | N/A | - |
| I pay attention to the applications for planning as listed in the local newspapers and from my own observations, (purely for my own interest), I find this adequate. | Noted – all Planning applications are advertised in the Worthing Herald | - | - |
| It seems to be left to the local press to notify news of major events, good or bad. Horrific proposals such as Asda’s ridiculous scheme also are kept under wraps for as long as possible. Local radio or TV local news should be given updates at frequent intervals. | Residents are consulted about Planning applications as soon as they are registered. Occasionally, press releases are issued but it is agreed that other ways of involving residents need to be explored. When there are significant delays with applications (such as Asda) it is difficult to be able to provide regular updates | June 2006 | ADPS |
| Information on County Council proposals are poorly communicated. | This concern has been passed to the County Council, although it is not clear which particular proposal this refers to. | N/A | - |
| Not notified by official letter regarding WB/05/0408/OUT. Not notified of planning meeting held before official cut off date! | Neighbours notified in accordance with the Code of Practice. Sometimes planning applications have to be considered before expiry of consultation period to enable applications to be determined within statutory timescales. | - | - |
| More public consultation before what little character the town has left is demolished for yet more flats and offices. | The Council is currently working on the replacement for the current Local Plan, known as the Local Development Framework(LDF) and this will involve significant public consultation with residents, businesses and visitors to the Town. | N/A | - |
| Presumably, you provide information on your website. | Yes – progress of Planning applications can be tracked on the website using the Council’s Public Access module. | - | - |
| Inform public of fee increases. | Fees are set by Central Government. However, letter was sent to all agents who regularly submit applications. Consideration to be given to press release prior to any future increase in fees. | - | SSM |
| More information relating to planning decision or agreement sent to me or via email – cannot always access planning office. | Increasing use is being made of email. The Council is currently considering the implementation of an Electronic Document and Records Management System to allow more data to be made available electronically. | Sept 2006 | ADPS |
| It depends what resources you have and how far you are prepared to go on supplying “free” information. | Resource is an issue. Emphasis is being placed on making information available on-line which is more cost effective. | Dec 2006 | SSM |
| On a previous occasion we wrote and advised of a construction which had no planning permission. Six months later, when we enquired again, we were informed that retrospective permission had been granted without any notification given to those who had made submissions initially. | Unable to investigate as no details are available. However, a complainant would normally be consulted when a relevant planning application is received unless anonymous complaint. | N/A | - |
| Greater use of email | We are making increasing use of email. We will consider ways of making greater use of email for consultation purposes. | Ongoing | ADPS |
| Notify applicants when the full eight weeks is required for a small, simple application. | We are still able to decide 98% of householder applications within 8 weeks and will continue to try to determine applications as quickly as possible. However, we do not have the resources to inform applicants in each case whether a decision is likely to take the full 8 week period. | N/A | - |
| The larger schemes in the town are shrouded in mystery until it is too late, e.g. the Asda abomination and those repulsive “Mussolini” heads overlooking Liverpool Gardens! | The ‘Mussolini’ heads are a matter of personal taste. Schemes such as ASDA have been thoroughly publicised, but it is accepted that they raise complex planning issues which are difficult to explain in detail. Providing more information on the website would assist public awareness of major schemes. | Dec 2005 | ADPS/SSM |
| Return phone calls. | Every effort is made to return phone calls. Staff will be reminded that calls should normally be returned within 24 hours. As indicated earlier, review procedures and use of telephone divert and voicemail. | Dec 2005 | ADPS |
Do you have any suggestions as to how we can improve the quality and range of Services we offer?
| Suggestion | Comment/Action | Action Date | Responsible Officer |
|---|---|---|---|
| More Planning Officers to deal with simple applications quicker i.e. replacement windows in flats. | We are currently trying to recruit additional and replacement Planning Officers | Dec 2005 | ADPS |
| Having a comprehensive list of Worthing’s Listed Buildings available at front desk and on website. | We will investigate whether it will be possible to include full details of all listed buildings on the website, using the Public Access module and GIS . Enquirers at the Planning Section reception can inspect the comprehensive list of Listed Buildings. | June 2006 | SSM |
| Further town amenities in preparation of Titnore Lane new houses – parking etc. | The West Durrington development includes a range of community/leisure facilities. The provision of town centre parking and other facilities will be reviewed as part of the LDF and Masterplan work. | Sept 2006 | - |
| Advertise the existence, with web address, of our website in all correspondence. | All correspondence includes the website address. However, it is agreed that there is a need to further publicise the Planning Section’s website. A publicity drive including press releases, leaflets etc will be organised at the same time as advertising the Section’s Public Access module | Dec 2005 | ADPS/SSM |
| Provide a proper service that ensures planning laws are not being breached. Enforce/investigate matters properly. | Nearly 500 enforcement complaints were investigated last year. Where a breach of Planning control is established and no remedial action is taken Enforcement action will normally follow if it is expedient to do so. However, the process is usually lengthy and the contravenor has a right of appeal. | N/A | - |
| You need to get the quality of your basic planning role right to start with. Your obvious main aim was to turn the application around within eight weeks and avoid an appeal. I still feel aggrieved that your recommendation was to grant permission for a very bad application. | Sometimes planning applications have to be approved despite significant local opposition as the Development Control Section has to consider other material considerations such as the need to provide more housing within the town and the need to take a flexible approach towards the level of car parking provision. | N/A | - |
| Sensitivity to voices and needs of people in the Borough. Facilities with young children – leisure facilities i.e. Aquarena and paddling pool. | The new Local Development Framework process is designed to enable a wide range of people and organisations to make their views known about the future development of the town. | Sept 2006 | ADPD |
| Use the planning process and power wherever possible to remedy the sad legacy of past mistakes and neglect and provide the essential amenities missing in Worthing – swimming pool/sports-centre, conference centre as at Burgess Hill “The Triangle” – seafront facilities/amenities for visitors, including enhancement of a neglected Brooklands – multiplex complex (cinemas/indoor bowling etc) as at Chichester – enhancement of neglected sports fields and efficient management – they are just as “dog-eared” …...and unfit for organised sport and for informal recreation-management of neglected trees. | The Council has set a number of key priorities to improve the economy and vitality of the town and improve leisure and sports facilities. The replacement of the current outdated Aquarena is an important aspect of this. The preparation of Masterplan will help to regenerate the town and maximise development opportunities | N/A | - |
| Speaking to various people I find that there are many conflicting ideas regarding what is and what isn’t a Conservation Area. Is it possible for this to be clarified, together with details of what one can or can’t do if living within such an area? | We have produced a leaflet ‘Conservation Areas – a Guide’. We will consider whether this leaflet requires updating or expanding. We will also consider other ways of improving public awareness of Conservation Areas and the planning restrictions that apply. | June 2006 | DCM/RS |
| The quality of service is first rate. The range of services is more or less governed by the requirements of local authority statute so the answer is that you are doing a good job in spite of circumstances! Congratulations! | Noted with thanks. | - | - |
| No – although there are many local developments, we are only informed of very few directly. | The extent of direct consultation must depend on the size and nature of each proposal in line with the adopted Code of Practice. | N/A | - |
| Allowing more public interaction at Planning Meetings. Installing a sound system at the meetings to enable the public to hear all that is being discussed. | A proposal to allow applicants to speak at Development Control Committee meetings is currently being considered. The visual aids available at meetings for committee members and members of the public have been improved. A microphone system has now also been installed. | N/A | - |
| As professional developers our main requirement is for a quick response, clear straightforward guidelines and a contact at the Council who we can foster a good working relationship with. | This is the type of service we try to provide. Applicant/Agents are provided with the name of the Planning Case Officer when the application is acknowledged. | N/A | - |
| You need more staff! | This is recognised and action has been taken to try to recruit additional Planning Officers | Dec 2005 | ADPS |
| Try to provide a service regardless of the period of time it takes to make a decision as people apply for planning permission – not refusal. | Whilst it is appreciated that applicants would like to avoid their applications being refused the Government has emphasised the need to determine the majority of planning applications within the statutory timescales and speed of decision is a Best Value Performance Indicator. | N/A | - |
| Have more consideration for development at West Durrington. | The proposed housing development was recently carefully considered and approved by the Council’s Development Control Committee subject to a comprehensive legal agreement securing a significant planning gain package. | - | - |
| Faster receipt of planning applications | The recent high volume of Planning applications has led to delays in registering Planning applications, despite the employment of an additional technician. However, this initial delay is having minimal effect on the Section’s ability to decide an average of 98% of applications within the prescribed 8 week period. | - | - |
| Hope that Teville Gate will become a high quality development worthy of the approach to the town and the station. | Noted | N/A | - |
| The services offered are adequate for their purpose and very efficiently carried out within the compass of their scope. What is needed is a “Think Tank” supported by “Outsiders” to consider all and any proposal to promote the Town. “Think Big” such as:- (i) Large and attractive conference centre at, say, Brooklands. (ii) Very upmarket hotel at, say, the Dome area. (iii) Miniature steam railway on the seafront from Ferring to Lancing (or even Shoreham Beach) – linking all the new features together with Shoreham Airport. | Noted. The Masterplan for the Town Centre and seafront will examine suggestions like this to improve the quality and range of facilities provided for the town. | Sept 2006 | ADPD |
Part 2 - Building Control Services
Were there any aspects of our service which did not please or impress you?
| Issue Raised | Comment/Action | Action Date | Responsible Officer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mike Clark’s passing caused great sadness to us all – he is badly missed – it would be a fitting tribute to replace him in-house. | A suitable candidate could not be found following two job advertisements. It was then decided to employ consultants on a trial basis. | N/A | - |
| Price of application. | Building Control has by law to cover relevant costs. Worthing’s fee structure/levels is in accordance with LGA advice. | N/A | - |
| Delay in release of building control approval certificate after final inspection on site. | Completion certificates are despatched as quickly as resources permit. This is usually between 3-7 days. | N/A | - |
| It was not clear that various fees are required at the beginning of job, whilst in planning office and a fee would be required after completion. | The information note on the fee structure is available in printed form and on the website. | N/A | - |
| Some structural calculations – where standard loading is evident – it should be possible to provide rapid advice/checking on timer/RSJ sizes. | Building Control does not provide an advice service on structural calculations. Deposited calculations are individually risk assessed in each case. Where appropriate they are then sent to a consultant for appraisal. | N/A | - |
Do you have any other suggestions as to how we can improve the quality and range of services we offer?
| Suggestion | Comment/Action | Action Date | Responsible Officer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Just try and maintain your current standard and I will have very little complaint. | Noted with thanks. | N/A | - |
| As stated previously, I don’t understand why Inspectors have no control over quality of workmanship. | Elements of construction must be fit for their purpose in order to satisfy Building Regulations. The standard of finish of, for example, decorations is not a Building Regulation matter. | N/A | - |
| Ensure staff accessible after 4 p.m. | A qualified member of the Building Control team is always available for advice until 5.15 p.m. (4.15 p.m. on a Friday). | N/A | - |
| How about 6 monthly seminars of half a day’s length to update and refresh “our” limited comprehension? A fee could be charged and handouts of latest “turn of events” or calculation examples would be most acceptable. | This suggestion will be given further serious consideration | - | BCM |
| Keep doing what you are doing right. If it ain’t broken don’t fix it. | Noted with thanks. | - | - |
| We are NHBC registered – in our 25th year. We have to conform to the guidelines set and rectify any problems, however small, for the first 2 years and the “insurance” covers the next 8 years. In our case I would suggest that inspections could be – perhaps scaled down? However, having renovated a number of properties where DIY has taken place I think more careful checks could be made! | All 'Statutory Inspections' are carried out as required. Other additional visits are made as required, depending on the standard of the work found and the experience/knowledge of the builder. | N/A | - |
| Just keep going as you are. | Noted. | - | - |
Your Comments On This Page
By sharing just a few words on how useful this page was, what was good, what was missing or confusing can really help us improve our website. Send a quick message to the web developer and your feedback will be used to improve this page. Do not use this form to lodge complaints or comments that need feedback.
Copyright and Policy
