1 of 53

Reducing Invalid Planning Applications A service pattern for digital planning submissions

Show & Tell 20

26 March 2021

Funded by

2 of 53

Partners collaborating:

working with

Open Systems Lab

Ho Lam User Researcher

Project website: www.ripa.digital

Blog: digitalplanningtech.medium.com

Twitter: @DigitalPlanTech

Facebook: Facebook.com/Digitalplantech

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/company/reducing-invalid-planning-applications

digitalplanning@lambeth.gov.uk / OSL (Open Systems Lab)

3 of 53

RIPA

Southwark-led

Back Office Planning System

BoPs - www.bops.digital

Camden-led

Inclusive Digital Place-based Engagement

www.localdigital.gov.uk/funded-project/place-based-engagement/

4 of 53

Show and Tell No. 20

Recap
Project partner team sprint catch up

a. POS Enterprises presentation

b. Benefits Case and Metrics

c Content Designer

d. Pre-private beta testing

User Researcher updates
Open Systems Lab updates�
National Call for Volunteers
Q&As

RIPA

5 of 53

The Problem

6 of 53

On average 50% of all Householder applications are invalid on receipt

The system is incredibly confusing for applicants to navigate

The process is hugely costly - in terms of time and money – for both applicants and planning authorities

There are a myriad websites that applicants need to visit for information before submitting

There are different local and national requirements that add further confusion

There is no indication at the point of submission that things could be amiss

7 of 53

“It was an absolute nightmare for such a simple job.”

“Biggest hurdle is to knowing which documents planners want.”

“It’s pretty confusing - for a long time I wasn't sure if I even needed to apply or not.”

“When the council drawing up list of validations should look back and see what officers actually use..”

“It was not clear (what I should apply for) so I mistakenly applied for a full planning application."

“This initiative will be welcome by many….the project could have a significant impact.”

8 of 53

2.a POS Enterprises presentation

9 of 53

The project teams gave a presentation of the Reducing Invalid Planning Applications and Back-office Planning System projects to the Planning Officers Society Enterprises learning group.

It was great to have the opportunity to demonstrate both projects and hear feedback from planners on the work we have done so far.

If you would like to find out more about

POS Enterprises you can visit their website at:

www.posenterprises.co.uk

RIPA

10 of 53

2.b Benefits Case and Metrics

11 of 53

RIPA

Joint meeting to discuss what is required in the updated benefits case and metrics requirements

Some of the main points from the meeting are below:

Cost Benefits Analysis spreadsheet

Non financial benefits

Measuring Customer Satisfaction

Data needed from other Local Authorities

Power Bi dashboard

This sprint we had a joint meeting with RIPA, BOPS and MHCLG to discuss what is required in the updated benefits case and metrics requirements.

Cost Benefits Analysis spreadsheet

There is an updated benefits case template that should be used moving forward.

This spreadsheet is designed to capture financial data for the project and capture the costs involved with onboarding other council.

This will be a working document will evolve over time.

Non-financial benefits

Confirmation that non-financial benefits need to be recorded in the accompanying narrative.

Measuring Customer Satisfaction

How can we measure this, one option discussed was the number of complaints and members enquired we receive? We will need to investigate this further in the coming sprints.

Data needed from other Local Authorities

To contact other local authorities to see what data they record.

Power BI dashboard

Buckinghamshire also showed a quick demo of the Power Bi dashboard they have created to gather data for the metrics.

12 of 53

2.c Content Designer

13 of 53

RIPA

We have posted an opportunity to join the RIPA team as a content designer on the digital marketplace.

Digital Marketplace is a government run platform that allow public sector to find technology or people.

We have been engaging with potential applicants via questions and answers and we are anticipating a good response.

Closing date for this role is the 31st March 2021

https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/14391

14 of 53

2.d Pre-private beta testing

15 of 53

RIPA

What we’ve been doing over this sprint:

Prepared 10 scenarios for end-to-end testing between RIPA / BoPS.

Colleagues from Bucks and Southwark have prepared accompanying plans and drawings�
Will test the factual accuracy of RIPA as well as the process of submitting, receiving and determining a LDC application�
Kicking off this testing over next sprint

Emily - as part of our preparations for private beta testing, we’ve been continuing to develop our ‘testing scenarios’. This has been mainly to test the accuracy of the tool against GPDO legislation, but over this sprint we’ve been expanding this to include end-to-end testing of the actual submission process and particularly how the data presents in BoPS. Following feedback from officers in our first 2 rounds of testing, we’ve decided to include with these scenarios the relevant plans and drawings that we’d expect with these types of applications. Colleagues across Bucks and Southwark have been working hard to create these plans and drawings, all standardised with a template put together by Southwark. We’re hoping to kick off this testing in the next sprint, which will look at some ‘happy path’ options (simple processes) and ‘sad path’ options which will test various elements of the process (e.g. invalid applications, incorrect details, etc). Now I’ll pass to Freya at Southwark to cover other work Southwark have been doing on this testing.

16 of 53

Show & tell /

User research updates

17 of 53

RIPA

User research overview

5

Iterations of ‘lawful development certificate’ journey

17

Users tested the LDC journey to date

9

Users tested ‘find out if you need a planning permission’ service

10

Users tested ‘full householder’ application

18 of 53

RIPA

We tested LDC journey with planning permission route

‘I want to build a porch at the front of my house’

Householder, not an agent
Never submitted an LDC
1 participant with English not her 1st language

Householder, not an agent
Never submitted an LDC, used agent for planning work before.
English 1st language

19 of 53

RIPA

Key findings: Draw site boundary component a bit fiddly to use.

Participant having trouble closing the line

‘Change boundary’ button is blocking user to review drawn line

‘If I am doing the wrong thing, I like it to say actually you are outside of your boundary'

‘I will be inclined to draw a boundary around the whole property rather than just front area, I don't know if it is right or wrong.

20 of 53

RIPA

Before

After

Key findings: Participant hunted around for option that fits for her project.

21 of 53

RIPA

Key findings: Reasons for refusal did not jump out for participants while they also wants to know what are their options moving forward.

‘I feel like I maybe lost the reason. It looks like the refusal jumps out but then what do I do then’

‘I like to know what my options are, this doesn't really tell me’

‘One it is a bit of shock that it might have been refused, but on the flipside it is also very helpful to get an immediate response, you know I haven't press sent and waited 6 weeks to hear about that.’

Participants would like the reason of potential refusal to be more obvious and elaborated.

They also would like to see what their options could be if the application is likely to be refused, and what would be the consequences if they decide to carry on for the application.

Eg. They would like to see link to the planning application service on the page if this is what their project may need as the system has suggested and some sort of messaging to warn them that a non-refundable application fee will be charged if they decided to carry on.

It is not clear to participants that the system is saving the process as they are going through it and they worry that if they drop off to research more/ get advice at this point their data would be lost.

We have not done any changes to this page yet but design improvements have been added to the roadmap and we will test it again when changes are being implanted.

22 of 53

RIPA

Key findings: More thoughts are needed on some of the words in used/ way we ask information in order to make the service truly inclusive and accessible.

Before

After

‘Is it more about the width? I will google footprint. Is the area is it?’

23 of 53

RIPA

Before

After

‘ ..language wise is quite complex for me’

24 of 53

RIPA

Key findings: Participant required more explanation on why personal information is needed from them.

Before

After

‘I would like to know why this is important for instance..’

25 of 53

RIPA

Overall comments

P.34 "I think it is very straight forward, very simple. But I am just thinking on the way of trying to make it as simple as possible, we don't lose those critical aspects like GDPR, the reasons for the information that we are asking.. more inclusive with people speaking other languages .." P.34

" I think this is good, the only thing I would say is that you don't know you are entering a 2 phrase process, phase one is preliminary checks..and then you continue with the actual detail application..."-P.33

" ..It needs a bit more guidance around the decision to proceed(when system says the application is likely to be refused)... if you proceed, you are proceed along these bases"-P.33

26 of 53

3.OSL

27 of 53

3a. An API endpoint for logging applications sent to BOPS

28 of 53

We store backup

Only for as long as useful for audit, analytics etc

BOPS

Receives and stores applications

Users

Collects data from user

Application data

Packaged up in BOPs requested format + structure

Service

Attaches a unique ID to each application

Returns a unique ID

This tells us application has been successfully received.

29 of 53

BOPS

Receives and stores applications

Users

Collects data from user

Application data

Packaged up in BOPs requested format + structure

✕

We have a stored backup

Only for as long as useful for audit, analytics etc

Service

Attaches a unique ID to each application

30 of 53

BOPS

Receives and stores applications

Users

Collects data from user

Application data

Packaged up in BOPs requested format + structure

Service

Attaches a unique ID to each application

Retry

Until succeeds

Service

Attaches a unique ID to each application

31 of 53

3b. Warnings & caveats!

32 of 53

33 of 53

34 of 53

3c. Full results & next steps

35 of 53

Find out if you need planning permission

36 of 53

Find out if you need planning permission

37 of 53

Apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness

38 of 53

3e. Calculate fee

39 of 53

40 of 53

41 of 53

Exempt

Don’t pay fee

42 of 53

Pay fee

Get a refund

43 of 53

Pay fee

Get a refund

44 of 53

Exempt

Don’t pay fee

Strong

pre-

checks

45 of 53

46 of 53

Householder

Fees in scope

Change of use

Minor

Major

Cross authority boundary sites

47 of 53

Householder

Fees in scope

Change of use

Minor

Major

Cross authority boundary sites

48 of 53

What’s ahead?

Connect to GOV.UK Pay services
Explore multiple fees
Add privacy notice
Add ‘Legal not to comply with condition’ LDC
Security
Accessibility
Design improvements

49 of 53

Q&As

50 of 53

Thank you.

Project website: www.ripa.digital

Project Log Link: https://www.ripa.digital/Project-log

Blog: digitalplanningtech.medium.com

Twitter: @DigitalPlanTech

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/company/reducing-invalid-planning-applications

Facebook: Facebook.com/Digitalplantech

digitalplanning@lambeth.gov.uk / OSL (Open Systems Lab)

51 of 53

RIPA

WORKSHOP SESSION

Review of project meetings schedule - Egle (20 mins)

gov.uk Pay - Test API keys - OSL (15 min)�
Privacy Policies - OSL (15 min)
Round 3 user testing - Emily (15 mins)�
Green Trello review (15 min)

52 of 53

3. Collaboration session

53 of 53

5. Any other business