some useful tools appendix a - planning
TRANSCRIPT
These tools are provided to help council undertake a review.
They should be applied as relevant and adopted to suit council
requirements.
A1: Planning scheme audit tool
A2: File audit tool
A3: Planning workload and office statistics audit tool
A4: Planning processes audit tool
Feedback and suggestions for improvements to the
tools are welcomed and should be emailed to
11
Appendix A: Some useful tools
12
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
Nam
e of
the
aud
itor:
Title
of
audi
tor:
Dat
e of
the
aud
it:
Cou
nter
sig
noff
:
Dat
e of
pre
viou
s au
dit:
Co
nsi
sten
cy w
ith
SPP
FN
oYe
sIf
no
, in
dic
ate
futu
re a
ctio
ns.
Doe
s th
e pl
anni
ng s
chem
e fu
rthe
r th
e ob
ject
ives
of
plan
ning
in V
icto
ria?
Doe
s th
e pl
anni
ng s
chem
e ad
vanc
e th
e st
rate
gic
dire
ctio
ns in
the
SPP
F an
d
adeq
uate
ly im
plem
ent
Stat
e Po
licy
appl
icab
le t
o th
e m
unic
ipal
ity?
• D
oes
the
MSS
res
pond
to
or f
urth
er t
he d
irect
ions
in M
elbo
urne
203
0 or
oth
er
rele
vant
Sta
te p
olic
ies?
Are
the
re c
lear
link
s be
twee
n th
e SP
PF a
nd t
he L
PPF?
1
2
Loca
l Pl
ann
ing
Po
licy
Fram
ewo
rk
Hav
e an
y is
sues
em
erge
d w
ith t
he M
SS s
ince
any
pre
viou
s re
view
?
• In
cons
iste
ncie
s w
ith S
tate
pol
icy
• D
iffic
ulty
in d
efen
ding
pol
icy
basi
s at
VC
AT
• O
utda
ted
polic
y
• Is
sues
rai
sed
in c
onsu
ltatio
n
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Is t
here
rep
etiti
on o
r co
nflic
t in
the
MSS
, su
ch a
s be
twee
n ho
usin
g an
d se
ttle
men
t
polic
ies?
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Doe
s th
e M
SS c
ompl
y w
ith t
he F
orm
at o
f M
unic
ipal
Str
ateg
ic S
tate
men
ts (
Febr
uary
1999
) V
PP P
ract
ice
Not
e?
No
Yes
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Doe
s th
e M
SS n
eed
sim
plifi
catio
n or
cla
rific
atio
n in
any
are
a?
• H
ave
issu
es b
een
rais
ed in
con
sulta
tion?
• Is
the
re d
iffic
ulty
in a
rgui
ng a
cas
e in
off
icer
rep
orts
or
at V
CA
T he
arin
gs?
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
3
Loca
l Pl
ann
ing
Po
licy
Fram
ewo
rk
Is a
ny a
spec
t of
the
MSS
not
rel
evan
t to
land
use
dec
isio
n-m
akin
g?
• D
o of
ficer
rep
orts
ref
er t
o th
e M
SS?
No
Yes
If ye
s, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Are
the
re a
ny m
atte
rs r
aise
d in
VC
AT
deci
sion
s, o
r Pl
anni
ng P
anel
s or
Adv
isor
y
Com
mitt
ee r
epor
ts t
hat
requ
ire im
prov
emen
ts t
o th
e LP
PF?
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Is c
ounc
il re
lyin
g on
ado
pted
cou
ncil
polic
ies
or g
uide
lines
in d
ecis
ion-
mak
ing
that
are
not
incl
uded
in t
he p
lann
ing
sche
me?
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Are
the
re p
artic
ular
pla
nnin
g is
sues
tha
t w
ould
ben
efit
from
a n
ew o
r re
vise
d lo
cal
polic
y?
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Are
the
re d
ocum
ents
tha
t sh
ould
be
incl
uded
as
a lo
cal p
olic
y (e
g A
dver
tisin
g Po
licy
or U
rban
Des
ign
Gui
delin
es)?
No
Yes
If ye
s, n
omin
ate
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
4
Ass
ess
the
stra
teg
ic o
bje
ctiv
esN
oYe
sIf
no
, in
dic
ate
futu
re a
ctio
ns.
Do
the
obje
ctiv
es in
the
MSS
ade
quat
ely
refle
ct t
he la
nd u
se a
nd d
evel
opm
ent
outc
omes
cou
ncil
wan
ts t
o ac
hiev
e?
Do
all t
he o
bjec
tives
hav
e sp
ecifi
c la
nd u
se o
r de
velo
pmen
t ou
tcom
es?
Are
the
obj
ectiv
es b
eing
ach
ieve
d?
Do
the
obje
ctiv
es s
ucce
ssfu
lly g
uide
pla
nnin
g de
cisi
ons?
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
5
Ass
ess
the
stra
teg
ies
No
Yes
If n
o,
ind
icat
e fu
ture
act
ion
s.
Are
the
str
ateg
ies
clea
rly li
nked
to
and
achi
evin
g th
e ob
ject
ives
?
Are
the
str
ateg
ies
achi
evin
g th
e de
sire
d ou
tcom
es?
Do
the
stra
tegi
es h
elp
info
rm p
lann
ing
deci
sion
s?
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
6
Stra
teg
ic g
aps
No
Yes
Has
cou
ncil
revi
ewed
the
pro
gres
s m
ade
on s
trat
egic
gap
s an
d ac
tions
iden
tifie
d in
the
last
rev
iew
?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Hav
e ch
ange
s be
en m
ade
to t
he S
PPF
that
req
uire
am
endm
ents
to
the
LPPF
? If
yes,
spe
cify
fut
ure
actio
n.
Doe
s co
unci
l hav
e co
mm
itmen
ts,
polic
ies
or p
rogr
ams
to a
ddre
ss p
artic
ular
pla
nnin
g
issu
es t
hat
shou
ld b
e in
clud
ed in
the
pla
nnin
g sc
hem
e?
If ye
s, s
peci
fy a
nd in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
7
Stra
teg
ic g
aps
No
Yes
Has
cou
ncil
revi
ewed
the
pro
gres
s m
ade
on s
trat
egic
gap
s an
d ac
tions
iden
tifie
d in
the
last
rev
iew
?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Hav
e ch
ange
s be
en m
ade
to t
he S
PPF
that
req
uire
am
endm
ents
to
the
LPPF
? If
yes,
spe
cify
fut
ure
actio
n.
Doe
s co
unci
l hav
e co
mm
itmen
ts,
polic
ies
or p
rogr
ams
to a
ddre
ss p
artic
ular
pla
nnin
g
issu
es t
hat
shou
ld b
e in
clud
ed in
the
pla
nnin
g sc
hem
e?
If ye
s, s
peci
fy a
nd in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Lin
ks w
ith
th
e C
ou
nci
l Pl
anN
oYe
s
Do
the
LPPF
obj
ectiv
es a
lign
with
land
use
and
dev
elop
men
t ob
ject
ives
of
the
Cou
ncil
Plan
?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Sinc
e th
e la
st r
evie
w,
do c
hang
es t
o th
e C
ounc
il Pl
an r
equi
re a
men
dmen
ts t
o th
e
LPPF
?
If ye
s, s
peci
fy a
nd in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
8
Ass
ess
the
VPP
im
ple
men
tati
on
to
ols
(lo
cal
pla
nn
ing
po
licie
s,
zon
es,
ove
rlay
s)N
oYe
s
Are
the
VPP
too
ls s
ucce
ssfu
l in
achi
evin
g th
e ob
ject
ives
, st
rate
gies
and
des
ired
outc
omes
?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Are
the
re a
ny V
PP t
ools
use
d th
at a
re n
o lo
nger
use
ful o
r ef
fect
ive?
Sho
uld
thes
e be
mod
ified
or
dele
ted
from
the
pla
nnin
g sc
hem
e?
If ye
s, s
peci
fy a
nd in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Are
the
too
ls c
lear
ly li
nked
to
the
obje
ctiv
es a
nd s
trat
egie
s in
the
LPP
F (a
re t
hey
stra
tegi
cally
driv
en o
r do
the
y pr
ovid
e fo
r a
stra
tegi
c ou
tcom
e)?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
9
Form
at,
con
sist
ency
& u
sab
ility
No
Yes
Are
the
MSS
and
LPP
exp
ress
ed in
pla
in E
nglis
h?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Is t
he in
tent
and
lang
uage
of
the
LPPF
cle
ar,
usab
le a
nd e
ffec
tive
in m
eetin
g co
unci
l
land
use
obj
ectiv
es a
nd d
ecis
ion-
mak
ing?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Are
the
re s
uper
fluou
s or
inco
nsis
tent
pol
icie
s, o
verla
ys a
nd s
ched
ules
tha
t no
long
er
cont
ribut
e to
cou
ncil
plan
ning
goa
ls a
nd o
bjec
tives
?
If ye
s, s
peci
fy a
nd in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Are
impr
ovem
ents
to
the
stat
utor
y dr
aftin
g of
the
pla
nnin
g sc
hem
e re
quire
d?If
yes,
spe
cify
and
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Has
the
LPP
F be
en a
sses
sed
agai
nst
the
rele
vant
VPP
Pra
ctic
e N
otes
?If
no,
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
10
Ass
ess
the
mo
nit
ori
ng
of
the
sch
eme
No
Yes
Is t
he p
lann
ing
sche
me
bein
g re
gula
rly m
onito
red
and
revi
ewed
?If
no,
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
Are
the
re m
onito
ring
proc
esse
s ta
rget
ing
the
key
stra
tegi
c ob
ject
ives
of
the
sche
me?
• Is
the
info
rmat
ion
easy
to
colle
ct?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Are
the
mon
itorin
g pr
oces
ses
the
mos
t ap
prop
riate
mea
ns o
f m
easu
ring
the
perf
orm
ance
of
the
obje
ctiv
es?
If no
, in
dica
te f
utur
e ac
tions
.
Can
the
mon
itorin
g of
the
pla
nnin
g sc
hem
e be
impr
oved
?If
yes,
indi
cate
fut
ure
actio
ns.
A1:
Pla
nn
ing
sch
eme
aud
it t
oo
l
1
The
follo
win
g ch
eckl
ist
is n
ot m
eant
to
be a
n ex
clus
ive
list
of t
he m
atte
rs t
o be
con
side
red
whe
n un
dert
akin
g a
file
audi
t. It
is m
eant
as
a gu
ide
to a
ssis
t co
unci
l. C
ounc
il ca
n am
end
this
list
to
suit
its n
eeds
.
For
inst
ance
, co
unci
l may
use
the
file
aud
it to
con
firm
or
deny
mat
ters
rai
sed
by s
take
hold
ers
or t
o ch
eck
whe
ther
pla
nnin
g pe
rmit
cond
ition
s ar
e be
ing
appl
ied
corr
ectly
. In
the
se c
ases
, co
unci
l will
nee
d to
var
y
the
chec
klis
t to
incl
ude
thes
e is
sues
.
Nam
e of
aud
itor:
Title
of
audi
tor:
Dat
e of
aud
it:
Cou
nter
sig
noff
:
Dat
e of
pre
viou
s au
dit:
Task
C
om
men
ts
Des
crip
tio
n
• H
as t
he p
lann
er a
ccur
atel
y de
scrib
ed t
he t
ype
of a
pplic
atio
n in
the
file
, th
e
adve
rtis
ing
mat
eria
l etc
?
Des
crib
e an
d do
cum
ent
inst
ance
s w
here
thi
s ha
s no
t oc
curr
ed.
A2:
File
au
dit
to
ol
Task
C
om
men
ts
Pre-
app
licat
ion
• W
as a
pre
-app
licat
ion
mee
ting
held
?
• W
as it
doc
umen
ted?
• W
ho u
nder
took
the
mee
ting?
Yes
/ N
o
Yes
/ N
o
Furt
her
in
form
atio
n
• W
as a
req
uest
for
fur
ther
info
rmat
ion
mad
e?
• If
yes,
how
long
did
it t
ake
to s
end
out?
Yes
/ N
o
Num
ber
of d
ays
Pub
lic n
oti
fica
tio
n
• D
id t
he p
lann
er d
ocum
ent
the
mat
eria
l det
rimen
t te
st?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e to
adv
ertis
e th
e ap
plic
atio
n on
ce a
ll in
form
atio
n w
as
rece
ived
?
Yes
/ N
o
Num
ber
of d
ays
Del
egat
ion
• W
as t
he p
erm
it de
term
ined
und
er d
eleg
atio
n?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e to
get
a d
eleg
ated
dec
isio
n?
Yes
/ N
o
Num
ber
of d
ays
Ref
erra
l
• H
ow m
any
days
did
it t
ake
to r
efer
the
app
licat
ion?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id t
he in
tern
al r
efer
ral c
omm
ents
tak
e?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id t
he e
xter
nal r
efer
rals
tak
e?
Num
ber
of d
ays
Num
ber
of d
ays
Num
ber
of d
ays
Nei
gh
bo
urh
oo
d a
nd
sit
e d
escr
ipti
on
(w
her
e re
leva
nt)
• D
id t
he p
lann
er c
ertif
y th
e si
te d
escr
iptio
n?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e?
Yes/
No
Num
ber
of d
ays
Site
in
spec
tio
ns
• D
id t
he p
lann
er u
nder
take
a s
ite in
spec
tion?
• A
fter
how
man
y da
ys?
• W
as t
he v
isit
docu
men
ted?
Yes/
No
Num
ber
of d
ays
Yes
/ N
o
A2:
File
au
dit
to
ol
2
Task
C
om
men
ts
Ap
plic
atio
n a
sses
smen
t
Did
the
pla
nner
doc
umen
t:
• W
hy a
per
mit
is r
equi
red?
• W
as t
he a
pplic
atio
n as
sess
ed a
gain
st t
he r
elev
ant
prov
isio
ns?
• W
ere
rele
vant
pol
icie
s us
ed t
o as
sess
the
app
licat
ion?
• W
as t
he o
ffic
er r
epor
t co
ncis
e ye
t co
mpl
ete
in it
s as
sess
men
t of
the
issu
es?
Perm
it tr
igge
rs
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
The
dec
isio
n
• W
ere
the
cond
ition
s on
the
off
icer
rep
ort
cons
iste
nt w
ith t
he p
erm
it/th
e N
oD?
• D
id t
he p
erm
it re
fer
to w
hich
pla
ns w
ere
bein
g ap
prov
ed?
• W
ere
refe
rral
aut
horit
y co
nditi
ons
accu
rate
ly a
pplie
d?
• W
as t
he d
ecis
ion
mad
e in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Dee
d of
Del
egat
ion?
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Tim
e ta
ken
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e to
dec
ide
the
appl
icat
ion
(in t
otal
)?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e to
mak
e a
deci
sion
aft
er r
ecei
pt o
f al
l inf
orm
atio
n?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e to
issu
e th
e N
oD,
perm
it or
ref
usal
aft
er t
he o
ffic
er
repo
rt w
as a
ppro
ved?
• W
as a
dec
isio
n m
ade
befo
re a
‘fa
ilure
to
dete
rmin
e’ r
evie
w lo
dged
at
VC
AT?
Num
ber
of d
ays
Num
ber
of d
ays
Num
ber
of d
ays
Yes
/ N
o
Rev
iew
• W
as a
rev
iew
lodg
ed?
• W
as t
here
inte
rnal
and
/or
exte
rnal
rep
rese
ntat
ion?
• W
as in
form
atio
n pr
ovid
ed t
o V
CA
T on
tim
e?
• H
ow lo
ng d
id it
tak
e to
issu
e a
perm
it or
ref
usal
?
Yes
/ N
o
Yes
/ N
o
Yes
/ N
o
Num
ber
of d
ays
A2:
File
au
dit
to
ol
3
4
Task
Co
mm
ents
Reg
iste
r
Wer
e th
e de
tails
rec
orde
d in
the
pla
nnin
g re
gist
er:
• Q
uick
ly?
• A
ccur
atel
y?
Num
ber
of d
ays
afte
r re
ceip
t of
an
appl
icat
ion
Yes
/ N
o
File
man
agem
ent
• W
as m
ater
ial o
n th
e fil
e ke
pt in
dat
e or
der?
• W
ere
file
note
s le
gibl
e an
d ad
equa
te?
• W
ere
docu
men
ts m
issi
ng?
• W
as t
he f
ile k
ept
in g
ood
orde
r?
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
A2:
File
au
dit
to
ol
1
Nam
e of
the
aud
itor:
Title
of
audi
tor:
Dat
e of
the
aud
it:
Cou
nter
sig
noff
:
Dat
e of
pre
viou
s au
dit:
Staf
f p
osi
tio
ns
Bu
dg
eted
sta
ff p
osi
tio
ns
(exp
ress
ed i
n
equ
ival
ent
full
tim
e p
osi
tio
ns
“EFT
s”)
Act
ual
sta
ff n
um
ber
s (e
xpre
ssed
in
equ
ival
ent
full
tim
e p
osi
tio
ns
“EFT
s”)
Staf
fin
g s
ho
rtfa
ll o
r o
vers
up
ply
Last
yea
rTh
is y
ear
Last
yea
rTh
is y
ear
Last
yea
rTh
is y
ear
Adm
inis
trat
ion
staf
f
Enfo
rcem
ent
offic
ers
Subd
ivis
ion
offic
ers
Stat
utor
y pl
anne
rs
Stra
tegi
c pl
anne
rs
Co-
ordi
nato
rs/
team
lead
ers
Plan
ning
man
ager
s
Dire
ctor
s
Con
trac
t (o
r ov
erlo
ad)
staf
f
Supp
ort
staf
f th
at w
ork
in t
he p
lann
ing
unit
(her
itage
, ur
ban
desi
gner
,
arbo
rist,
stu
dent
pla
nner
, pa
ra p
lann
er)
Tota
l
Som
eth
ing
to
co
nsi
der
?
Wha
t ro
le d
o co
nsul
tant
s an
d co
ntra
ct s
taff
pla
y in
the
ope
ratio
n of
the
pla
nnin
g un
it? F
or in
stan
ce,
do t
hey
wor
k on
min
or a
pplic
atio
ns o
r re
pres
ent
coun
cil a
t V
CA
T?
A3:
Pla
nn
ing
wo
rklo
ad a
nd
off
ice
stat
isti
cs a
ud
it t
oo
l
Wo
rklo
ad
Dat
a fr
om
Pla
nn
ing
Per
mit
Act
ivit
y R
epo
rtLa
st y
ear
This
yea
r
Cou
ncil
Regi
onSt
ate
Cou
ncil
Regi
onSt
ate
Tota
l app
licat
ions
lodg
ed
Tota
l num
ber
of d
ecis
ions
on
appl
icat
ions
lodg
ed
• Pe
rmit
/ N
oD
• Re
fusa
l
• W
ithdr
awn
/ la
psed
No.
%N
o.%
No.
%N
o.%
Mai
n la
nd u
se o
r de
velo
pmen
t ca
tego
ry f
or a
pplic
atio
ns
• Re
side
ntia
l alte
ratio
ns a
nd a
dditi
ons
• O
ne n
ew d
wel
ling
• M
ore
than
one
new
dw
ellin
g
• O
ther
acc
omm
odat
ion
• A
gric
ultu
re
• Bu
ildin
gs a
nd w
orks
onl
y
• In
dust
ry,
war
ehou
se o
r st
ore
• O
ffic
e
• O
ther
• Re
tail
prem
ises
• Su
bdiv
isio
n on
ly
• Ve
geta
tion
rem
oval
• Pa
rkin
g
• A
dver
tisin
g si
gns
Oth
er w
ork
load
in
form
atio
nLa
st y
ear
This
yea
r
Num
ber
of p
lann
ing
info
rmat
ion
requ
ests
/lett
ers
Num
ber
of p
lann
ing
cert
ifica
tes
Num
ber
of r
eque
sts
to a
men
d pl
ans/
plan
ning
per
mits
Num
ber
of p
lann
ing
sche
me
amen
dmen
ts
Num
ber
of P
lann
ing
Pane
ls/A
dvis
ory
Com
mitt
ees
Num
ber
of s
trat
egic
stu
dies
or
othe
r pl
anni
ng in
itiat
ives
A3:
Pla
nn
ing
wo
rklo
ad a
nd
off
ice
stat
isti
cs a
ud
it t
oo
l
2
Co
st
Co
st t
o o
per
ate
stat
uto
ry a
nd
str
ateg
ic f
un
ctio
ns
of
the
cou
nci
l La
st y
ear
This
yea
r
A.
Stat
utor
y
B. S
trat
egic
C.
Tota
l cos
t (A
+B
= C
)
D.
Fee
inco
me
rece
ived
E. B
alan
ce (
C-D
= E
)
F. A
vera
ge c
ost
per
appl
icat
ion
(E/
tota
l num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns)
= F
.
So
meth
ing
to
co
nsi
der?
• Is
the
re a
n op
port
unity
to
shar
e th
is d
ata
with
oth
er c
ounc
ils in
you
r ar
ea t
o di
scus
s co
st s
truc
ture
s?
• W
hat
less
ons
coul
d be
lear
ned
from
sha
ring
this
sor
t of
info
rmat
ion?
VC
AT
Rev
iew
an
d e
nfo
rcem
ent
(ref
er V
CA
T)
Cat
ego
ry
Last
yea
r Th
is y
ear
Num
ber
of V
CA
T re
view
s
Num
ber
of V
CA
T re
view
s by
obj
ecto
rs a
bout
dec
isio
n to
gra
nt a
per
mit
Num
ber
of V
CA
T re
view
s by
app
lican
ts a
bout
dec
isio
n to
ref
use
a pe
rmit
Num
ber
of V
CA
T re
view
s by
app
lican
t ab
out
cond
ition
s
Num
ber
of V
CA
T re
view
s by
app
lican
t ov
er f
ailu
re t
o de
cide
an
appl
icat
ion
Num
ber
of e
nfor
cem
ent
orde
r ap
plic
atio
ns
Num
ber
of o
ther
mat
ters
Tota
l
Tim
e fr
ames
fo
r m
akin
g d
ecis
ion
s
Usi
ng c
ounc
il in
form
atio
n sy
stem
s or
rel
ying
on
the
info
rmat
ion
colle
cted
dur
ing
the
file
audi
t, d
escr
ibe
the
time
take
n (s
tatu
tory
pla
nnin
g da
ys)
to d
eter
min
e pl
anni
ng p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
ns.
Last
yea
r Th
is y
ear
With
in 6
0 da
ys
With
in 9
0 da
ys
With
in 1
20 d
ays
Mor
e th
an 1
20 d
ays
A3:
Pla
nn
ing
wo
rklo
ad a
nd
off
ice
stat
isti
cs a
ud
it t
oo
l
3
4
File
s p
er s
taff
mem
ber
Des
crib
e th
e av
erag
e nu
mbe
r of
pla
nnin
g m
atte
rs t
hat
are
allo
cate
d to
pla
nnin
g st
aff.
A.
Num
ber
of a
ll pl
anni
ng s
taff
invo
lved
in a
sses
smen
t of
pla
nnin
g pe
rmit
appl
icat
ions
(in
clud
ing
tem
pora
ry,
cont
ract
, ad
min
istr
atio
n st
aff
and
team
lead
ers)
B. N
umbe
r of
act
ive
plan
ning
app
licat
ions
bei
ng
asse
ssed
by
coun
cil t
oday
C.
Ratio
of
appl
icat
ions
per
staf
f (B
/A =
C)
This
yea
r
C.
Ratio
of
appl
icat
ions
per
staf
f (B
/A =
C)
Last
yea
r
A.
Num
ber
of a
ll pl
anni
ng s
taff
invo
lved
in a
men
ded
plan
s (in
clud
ing
tem
pora
ry,
con
trac
t, a
dmin
istr
atio
n st
aff
and
team
lead
ers)
B. N
umbe
r of
act
ive
amen
ded
plan
s be
ing
asse
ssed
by c
ounc
il to
day
C.
Ratio
of
appl
icat
ions
per
staf
f (B
/A =
C)
This
yea
r
C.
Ratio
of
appl
icat
ions
per
staf
f (B
/A =
C)
Last
yea
r
A.
Num
ber
of a
ll pl
anni
ng s
taff
invo
lved
in a
ctiv
e V
CA
T re
view
s (in
clud
ing
tem
pora
ry,
con
trac
t, a
dmin
istr
atio
n
staf
f an
d te
am le
ader
s)
B. N
umbe
r of
act
ive
VC
AT
revi
ews
bein
g as
sess
ed
by c
ounc
il to
day
C.
Ratio
of
revi
ews
per
staf
f (B
/A =
C)
This
yea
r
C.
Ratio
of
revi
ews
per
staf
f
(B/A
= C
)
Last
yea
r
A.
Num
ber
of a
ll pl
anni
ng s
taff
invo
lved
in a
ctiv
e pl
anni
ng p
anel
s (in
clud
ing
tem
pora
ry,
con
trac
t, a
dmin
istr
atio
n
staf
f an
d te
am le
ader
s)
B. N
umbe
r of
act
ive
plan
ning
pan
els
bein
g as
sess
ed
by c
ounc
il to
day
C.
Ratio
of
pane
ls
per
staf
f (B
/A =
C)
This
yea
r
C.
Ratio
of
pane
ls p
er s
taff
(B/A
= C
)
Last
yea
r
A3:
Pla
nn
ing
wo
rklo
ad a
nd
off
ice
stat
isti
cs a
ud
it t
oo
l
1
Nam
e of
the
aud
itor:
Title
of
audi
tor:
Dat
e of
the
aud
it:
Cou
nter
sig
noff
:
Dat
e of
pre
viou
s au
dit:
1.
Pre-
app
licat
ion
Mee
tin
gs
Ho
w w
e h
ave
per
form
ed
Imp
rove
men
ts t
o p
erfo
rman
ce
(Wh
at d
o w
e w
ant
to i
mp
rove
?)
Yes
N
oSh
ort
Term
Med
ium
Ter
m
Long
Ter
m
1.1.
Doe
s co
unci
l hav
e a
proc
ess
for
man
agin
g pr
e-ap
plic
atio
n m
eetin
gs?
1.2
Are
the
se m
eetin
gs d
ocum
ente
d?
1.3
Is t
here
mat
eria
l ava
ilabl
e to
info
rm a
pplic
ants
of
the
bene
fits
of t
he
proc
ess?
• A
t th
e co
unte
r
• O
n th
e w
eb s
ite
1.4
Is t
here
a c
heck
list
to s
how
the
sor
t of
info
rmat
ion
to b
e su
bmitt
ed w
ith
plan
ning
app
licat
ions
?
1.5
Hav
e st
aff
been
tra
ined
to
cond
uct
pre-
appl
icat
ion
mee
tings
?
1.6
Is t
here
a p
roce
ss f
or in
volv
ing
staf
f fr
om o
ther
dep
artm
ents
in p
re-
appl
icat
ion
mee
tings
? (e
g tr
affic
eng
inee
rs/
arbo
rist)
1.7
Wha
t %
of
appl
icat
ions
had
file
not
es f
or p
re-a
pplic
atio
n m
eetin
gs (
colle
ct
as p
art
of f
ile a
udit)
?
%
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
2
2. R
egis
trat
ion
, lo
dg
emen
t, r
efer
ral
and
ass
ign
men
t
This
info
rmat
ion
can
be c
ompi
led
eith
er f
rom
the
file
aud
it or
fro
m c
ounc
il’s
plan
ning
reg
iste
r/da
taba
se.
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
ns
Cu
rren
t p
erfo
rman
cePe
rfo
rman
ce
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et
Year
2Ye
ar 3
Shor
t te
rm
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
2.1
Regi
ster
an
appl
icat
ion.
Cou
ncil
regi
ster
s __
% o
f ne
w
appl
icat
ions
with
in
___
wor
king
day
s of
rece
ipt.
2.2
Send
ack
now
ledg
men
t le
tter
. C
ounc
il ta
kes
an a
vera
ge o
f _
__ d
ays
to
ackn
owle
dge
an a
pplic
atio
n.
2.3
Cre
ate
an e
lect
roni
c an
d ha
rd c
opy
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n.
Cou
ncil
take
s an
ave
rage
of
___
days
to c
reat
e el
ectr
onic
and
har
d co
py
appl
icat
ion.
2.4
Allo
cate
the
app
licat
ion
to a
pla
nner
.A
pplic
atio
ns a
re a
lloca
ted
to a
pla
nner
with
in _
__ d
ays.
2.5
Inte
rnal
and
ext
erna
l ref
erra
l
requ
irem
ents
iden
tifie
d an
d
appl
icat
ion
retu
rned
.
App
licat
ions
are
sen
t to
ref
erra
l
auth
oriti
es w
ithin
an
aver
age
of _
__
days
.
2.6
Exte
rnal
ref
erra
ls s
ent
out
with
in
28 d
ays
of r
ecei
ving
req
uire
d
info
rmat
ion.
__
% o
f ap
plic
atio
ns w
here
ref
erra
ls
sent
out
with
in 2
8 da
ys.
2.7
Adv
ice
from
inte
rnal
ref
erra
ls is
rece
ived
.
Adv
ice
from
inte
rnal
ref
erra
ls is
rec
eive
d
on a
vera
ge w
ithin
___
day
s.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
3
3. Pr
elim
inar
y as
sess
men
t
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
ns
Cu
rren
t p
erfo
rman
cePe
rfo
rman
ce t
arg
etIm
pro
vem
ents
th
at c
ou
nci
l w
ill m
ake
to a
chie
ve t
he
per
form
ance
tar
get
Year
2Ye
ar 3
Shor
t te
rm
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
3.1
Und
erta
ke a
site
insp
ectio
n.Si
te in
spec
tions
mad
e w
ithin
an
aver
age
of _
__ d
ays
of a
pplic
atio
n re
ceip
t.
3.2
Und
erta
ke a
nd c
ompl
ete
a
prel
imin
ary
asse
ssm
ent
of t
he
appl
icat
ion.
Prel
imin
ary
asse
ssm
ents
und
erta
ken
for
___%
of
appl
icat
ions
.
3.3
Prov
ide
advi
ce o
n th
e ac
cept
ance
of s
ite c
onte
xt /
des
ign
resp
onse
plan
s (C
laus
e 54
, 55
, 56
) w
ithin
10
wor
king
day
s of
the
off
icer
rec
eivi
ng
the
file.
Adv
ice
on s
ite c
onte
xt a
nd d
esig
n
resp
onse
is u
sual
ly g
iven
with
in _
__
days
.
3.4
Mak
e a
requ
est
for
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
with
in 2
8 da
ys f
rom
rece
ivin
g an
app
licat
ion.
__%
of
requ
ests
for
mor
e in
form
atio
n
are
mad
e w
ithin
28
days
of
rece
ipt.
3.5
Inte
rnal
and
ext
erna
l ref
erra
ls
rece
ived
.
Inte
rnal
ref
erra
ls r
ecei
ved
on a
vera
ge:
___
days
. Ex
tern
al r
efer
als
rece
ived
on
aver
age:
___
day
s.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
4
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
4.
Co
nsu
ltat
ion
an
d p
ub
lic n
oti
fica
tio
n
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
nC
urr
ent
per
form
ance
Pe
rfo
rman
ce
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et
Year
2
Year
3Sh
ort
term
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
4.1
Doc
umen
t m
ater
ial d
etrim
ent
deci
sion
.
Doc
umen
ted
in _
__%
of
appl
icat
ion
files
.
4.2
Doc
umen
ted
adve
rtis
ing
requ
irem
ents
.
Doc
umen
ted
in _
__%
of
appl
icat
ion
files
.
4.3
Adv
ertis
e th
e ap
plic
atio
n.A
vera
ge n
umbe
r of
day
s ta
ken
to
adve
rtis
e th
e ap
plic
atio
n af
ter
rece
ivin
g
all r
equi
red
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
is
___
days
.
4.4
Ack
now
ledg
e su
bmis
sion
s.A
vera
ge n
umbe
r of
day
s ta
ken
to s
end
a
lett
er a
fter
rec
eivi
ng a
sub
mis
sion
is
___
days
.
4.5
Con
duct
a c
onsu
ltatio
n m
eetin
g
(if r
equi
red)
.
Ave
rage
num
ber
of d
ays
befo
re a
cons
ulta
tion
mee
ting
is h
eld
(aft
er n
otic
e
requ
irem
ents
met
– 1
4 da
ys e
xpire
d an
d
stat
utor
y de
clar
atio
n re
turn
ed)
is
___
days
.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
5
5.
Del
egat
ion
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
nC
urr
ent
per
form
ance
Pe
rfo
rman
ce
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et
Year
2
Year
3
5.1
Is t
here
a p
roce
ss t
o en
sure
that
pla
nner
s ar
e aw
are
of t
heir
resp
onsi
bilit
ies
unde
r th
e D
eed
of
Del
egat
ion?
Yes/
No
(Con
side
r a
brie
f su
rvey
of
plan
ning
sta
ff
to c
heck
res
pons
es)
Shor
t te
rm
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
5.2
Are
dec
isio
ns m
ade
in a
ccor
danc
e
with
the
req
uire
men
t of
the
Dee
d of
Del
egat
ion?
Usi
ng a
file
aud
it, c
heck
tha
t de
cisi
ons
have
bee
n m
ade
cons
iste
nt w
ith t
he
Dee
d of
Del
egat
ion.
___%
com
ply.
5.3
Whe
n di
d co
unci
l las
t re
view
the
Dee
d of
Del
egat
ion?
Year
last
rev
iew
ed.
5.4
Are
the
re a
spec
ts o
f th
e D
eed
of
Del
egat
ion
that
are
lead
ing
to
bloc
kage
s in
the
ass
essm
ent
of
plan
ning
app
licat
ions
?
List
the
asp
ects
tha
t ar
e ca
usin
g
bloc
kage
s.
5.5
Wha
t pe
rcen
tage
of
deci
sion
s ar
e
mad
e by
del
egat
ion?
Del
egat
e de
cide
s _
__
% o
f al
l
appl
icat
ions
.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
6
6.
Ass
essm
ent,
file
man
agem
ent,
rep
ort
ing
an
d d
ecis
ion
-mak
ing
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
nC
urr
ent
per
form
ance
Pe
rfo
rman
ce
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et
Year
2
Year
3Sh
ort
term
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
6.1
Are
pla
nner
s ac
cura
tely
des
crib
ing
the
type
of
use
or d
evel
opm
ent
prop
osed
?
Ach
ieve
d in
___
% o
f ca
ses.
6.2
Are
pla
nner
s ce
rtify
ing
the
neig
hbou
rhoo
d an
d si
te d
escr
iptio
n?
Cer
tifie
d in
___
% o
f ca
ses.
6.3
Has
the
pla
nner
und
erta
ken
a si
te
insp
ectio
n (o
r do
cum
ente
d th
e
reas
ons
why
an
insp
ectio
n w
as n
ot
requ
ired)
?
Site
insp
ectio
n oc
curr
ed in
___
_% o
f
appl
icat
ions
.
No
site
insp
ectio
n oc
curr
ed,
but
reas
ons
give
n in
___
__%
of
appl
icat
ions
.
No
insp
ectio
n oc
curr
ed a
nd n
o re
ason
s
give
n in
___
__%
of
appl
icat
ions
.
6.4
Has
the
site
insp
ectio
n be
en
docu
men
ted?
Site
insp
ectio
n do
cum
ente
d in
___
__%
of a
pplic
atio
ns.
6.5
Has
the
pla
nner
ass
esse
d th
e
appl
icat
ion
agai
nst
rele
vant
pol
icie
s?
App
licab
le p
olic
ies
wer
e as
sess
ed in
____
_% o
f ap
plic
atio
ns.
6.6
Has
the
pla
nner
ass
esse
d th
e ap
plic
atio
n
agai
nst
the
rele
vant
pro
visio
ns?
App
licab
le p
rovi
sion
s w
ere
asse
ssed
in
____
_% o
f ap
plic
atio
ns.
6.7
Is t
he m
ater
ial o
n fil
e ke
pt in
dat
e
orde
r?
Mat
eria
l kep
t in
dat
e or
der
in _
____
%
of f
iles.
6.8
Is t
he f
ile c
ompl
ete
with
no
docu
men
ts m
issi
ng?
Doc
umen
tatio
n w
as c
ompl
ete
in _
____
%
of f
iles.
6.9
Are
the
con
ditio
ns in
the
off
icer
rep
ort
accu
rate
ly in
clud
ed o
n Pe
rmit
/ NoD
?
Perm
its a
ccur
atel
y lis
t of
ficer
’s co
nditi
ons
in _
____
% o
f fil
es.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
7
6.
Ass
essm
ent,
file
man
agem
ent,
rep
ort
ing
an
d d
ecis
ion
-mak
ing
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
nC
urr
ent
per
form
ance
Pe
rfo
rman
ce
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et
Year
2
Year
3Sh
ort
term
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
6.1
Are
pla
nner
s ac
cura
tely
des
crib
ing
the
type
of
use
or d
evel
opm
ent
prop
osed
?
Ach
ieve
d in
___
% o
f ca
ses.
6.2
Are
pla
nner
s ce
rtify
ing
the
neig
hbou
rhoo
d an
d si
te d
escr
iptio
n?
Cer
tifie
d in
___
% o
f ca
ses.
6.3
Has
the
pla
nner
und
erta
ken
a si
te
insp
ectio
n (o
r do
cum
ente
d th
e
reas
ons
why
an
insp
ectio
n w
as n
ot
requ
ired)
?
Site
insp
ectio
n oc
curr
ed in
___
_% o
f
appl
icat
ions
.
No
site
insp
ectio
n oc
curr
ed,
but
reas
ons
give
n in
___
__%
of
appl
icat
ions
.
No
insp
ectio
n oc
curr
ed a
nd n
o re
ason
s
give
n in
___
__%
of
appl
icat
ions
.
6.4
Has
the
site
insp
ectio
n be
en
docu
men
ted?
Site
insp
ectio
n do
cum
ente
d in
___
__%
of a
pplic
atio
ns.
6.5
Has
the
pla
nner
ass
esse
d th
e
appl
icat
ion
agai
nst
rele
vant
pol
icie
s?
App
licab
le p
olic
ies
wer
e as
sess
ed in
____
_% o
f ap
plic
atio
ns.
6.6
Has
the
pla
nner
ass
esse
d th
e ap
plic
atio
n
agai
nst
the
rele
vant
pro
visio
ns?
App
licab
le p
rovi
sion
s w
ere
asse
ssed
in
____
_% o
f ap
plic
atio
ns.
6.7
Is t
he m
ater
ial o
n fil
e ke
pt in
dat
e
orde
r?
Mat
eria
l kep
t in
dat
e or
der
in _
____
%
of f
iles.
6.8
Is t
he f
ile c
ompl
ete
with
no
docu
men
ts m
issi
ng?
Doc
umen
tatio
n w
as c
ompl
ete
in _
____
%
of f
iles.
6.9
Are
the
con
ditio
ns in
the
off
icer
rep
ort
accu
rate
ly in
clud
ed o
n Pe
rmit
/ NoD
?
Perm
its a
ccur
atel
y lis
t of
ficer
’s co
nditi
ons
in _
____
% o
f fil
es.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
7.
Ap
plic
atio
ns
for
Rev
iew
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
ns
Cu
rren
t p
erfo
rman
ce
Perf
orm
ance
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
per
form
ance
tar
get
Year
2
Year
3Sh
ort
term
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
7.1
Has
cou
ncil
cons
iste
ntly
ret
urne
d
advi
ce r
eque
sted
by
VC
AT
with
in
the
pres
crib
ed t
ime?
Cou
ncil
retu
rns
mat
eria
l with
in
pres
crib
ed t
ime
on
___%
of
occa
sion
s.
7.2
Are
the
con
ditio
ns c
onsi
sten
tly
circ
ulat
ed in
the
pre
scrib
ed t
ime?
Cou
ncil
circ
ulat
es c
ondi
tions
ten
day
s
prio
r to
hea
ring
in _
__ %
of
revi
ews.
7.3
% o
f C
ounc
il de
cisi
ons
over
turn
ed
at a
rev
iew
by
VC
AT.
Cou
ncil
deci
sion
s ov
ertu
rned
on
revi
ew
by V
CA
T fo
r.
• __
_% o
f de
cisi
ons
mad
e by
off
icer
s.
• __
_% o
f de
cisi
ons
mad
e by
cou
ncill
ors.
7.4
How
man
y V
CA
T re
view
s ar
e
unde
rtak
en b
y ex
tern
al c
onsu
ltant
s /
law
yers
etc
?
___
% o
f al
l rev
iew
s ar
e un
dert
aken
by
exte
rnal
sta
ff.
7.5
How
man
y of
ficer
day
s ha
s co
unci
l
spen
t at
VC
AT?
___
offic
er d
ays
are
spen
t at
VC
AT.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
8. En
forc
emen
t
Cou
ncil
is e
ncou
rage
d to
dev
elop
an
enfo
rcem
ent
serv
ice
that
und
erta
kes:
• A
rea
ctiv
e se
rvic
e, t
hat
resp
onds
to
com
plai
nts
from
the
pub
lic o
r ot
her
coun
cil s
taff
and
tak
es e
nfor
cem
ent
actio
n w
here
app
ropr
iate
.
• A
com
plia
nce
serv
ice
that
ens
ures
pro
posa
ls c
ompl
y w
ith p
erm
it co
nditi
ons
(eith
er p
rior
to c
ompl
etio
n or
prio
r to
occ
upat
ion)
. Fo
r ex
ampl
e, c
ompl
ianc
e w
ith t
he r
equi
rem
ents
of
a la
ndsc
apin
g pl
an.
• A
pro
-act
ive
serv
ice
that
mon
itors
exi
stin
g pe
rmits
to
ensu
re c
ompl
ianc
e w
ith p
lann
ing
perm
its.
Plan
nin
g a
ctio
n
Cu
rren
t p
erfo
rman
cePe
rfo
rman
ce
targ
et
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et
Year
2Ye
ar 3
Shor
t te
rm
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
8.1
Rea
ctiv
e se
rvic
es
How
man
y co
mpl
aint
s ha
ve b
een
rece
ived
by
coun
cil i
n re
latio
n to
brea
ches
of
the
sche
me
etc?
Num
ber
of c
ompl
aint
s re
ceiv
ed _
___.
8.2
How
man
y da
ys h
as it
tak
en c
ounc
il
to r
espo
nd t
o co
mpl
aint
s?
Ave
rage
num
ber
of d
ays
take
n to
a
resp
ond
to c
ompl
aint
is _
___
days
.
8.3
Co
mp
lian
ce s
ervi
ces
How
man
y pl
anni
ng p
erm
its a
re
chec
ked
for
com
plia
nce
with
cond
ition
s?
Num
ber
and
perc
enta
ge o
f pe
rmits
chec
ked.
___
___%
8.4
Pro
-act
ive
serv
ices
How
man
y pr
o-ac
tive
insp
ectio
ns a
re
unde
rtak
en e
ach
year
?
The
num
ber
of in
spec
tions
con
duct
ed
each
yea
r is
___
_.
8.5
How
man
y br
each
es a
re d
etec
ted
durin
g th
ese
insp
ectio
ns?
The
num
ber
of b
reac
hes
iden
tifie
d is
____
whi
ch is
___
_% o
f th
e nu
mbe
r of
insp
ectio
ns.
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
8
8
9.
Trai
nin
g a
nd
su
pp
ort
Prof
essi
onal
tra
inin
g an
d ed
ucat
ion
is v
ital i
n or
der
to d
eliv
er h
igh
qual
ity p
lann
ing
serv
ices
. M
ost
orga
nisa
tions
hav
e tr
aini
ng p
lans
in p
lace
for
pro
fess
iona
l sta
ff.
This
sec
tion
prov
ides
an
oppo
rtun
ity t
o re
view
this
pla
n an
d en
sure
its
effe
ctiv
enes
s an
d im
plem
enta
tion.
Trai
nin
g a
nd
ed
uca
tio
n q
ues
tio
ns
Cu
rren
t p
erfo
rman
ce
Perf
orm
ance
tar
get
Imp
rove
men
ts t
hat
co
un
cil
will
mak
e to
ach
ieve
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et.
Year
2
Year
3
9.1
Doe
s th
e pl
anni
ng u
nit
have
an
indu
ctio
n pr
oces
s fo
r ne
w s
taff
?
Shor
t te
rm
Med
ium
ter
m
Long
ter
m
9.2
Whe
n w
as t
he in
duct
ion
prog
ram
last
rev
iew
ed?
9.3
Doe
s th
e pl
anni
ng u
nit
have
a
trai
ning
pla
n fo
r its
pro
fess
iona
l and
adm
inis
trat
ion
staf
f?
9.4
Whe
n w
as t
his
plan
last
rev
iew
ed?
9.5
Whe
n w
as t
he la
st t
ime
staf
f
wer
e co
nsul
ted
over
tra
inin
g an
d
educ
atio
nal n
eeds
?
9.6
Hav
e m
anag
ers
or c
oord
inat
ors
iden
tifie
d sp
ecifi
c tr
aini
ng n
eeds
tha
t
need
to
be a
ddre
ssed
eg
men
torin
g?
9.7
Hav
e m
anag
ers/
co-o
rdin
ator
s be
en
give
n ap
prop
riate
man
agem
ent
trai
ning
?
Has
co
un
cil
met
th
e p
erfo
rman
ce t
arg
et i
den
tifi
ed i
n t
he
pre
vio
us
revi
ew?
Is p
erfo
rman
ce im
prov
ing
as p
ropo
sed?
Is f
urth
er a
ctio
n re
quire
d?
A4:
Pla
nn
ing
pro
cess
es a
ud
it t
oo
l
9