Director in charge defends Telford & Wrekin Council principle of offering paid pre-application advice

A rebrand will not be enough to change the perception that using a council’s in-house consultancy gives clients an unfair advantage in the planning process, an opposition member claims.

James Dunn, the prosperity and investment director at Telford & Wrekin Council said he had decided “apT” – which was set up in 2017 and offers “enhanced services” including pre-application consultation on projects – should revert to its previous title, “Telford and Wrekin Development Management”, because the newer brand confuses the public.

Conservative councillor Stephen Bentley said “architects, developers and private people” believed paying to have an application looked at meant “you’re going to get it through” and the name change would not change that.

Mr Dunn told the Communities Scrutiny Committee that offering pre-application advice helped keep the process faster and smoother.

In a report, Mr Dunn said Development Management originally offered free pre-application advice but introduced fees because the number of enquiries was “significantly higher” than the number of paid-for applications.

Introducing charges meant the team could concentrate on serious enquiries and provide a “more focussed, high-quality and timely service”, he added.

“Concerns have been raised by some members and public” since the apT brand was brought in, with some saying it looked like “the department being outsources to a third-party company”, Mr Dunn wrote.

He added: “For example, a resident who makes an enquiry with the LPA [local planning authority] in regard to an application at a nearby address would correspond with the relevant planning officer receiving an email from ‘@apt-group.co.uk’ and a branded signature despite the fact that the correspondence is from the planning officer working on statutory matters.”

He told councillors this was why he ordered the apT brand to be withdrawn.

Councillor Bentley, who represents Edgmond and Ercall Magna, said the perceived lack of transparency would remain.

Mr Dunn said an applicant still had to make a planning application, which would be judged on merit, even after using the paid-for services.

“That isn’t what people are seeing,” Councillor Bentley said.

“What they believe is: ‘You pay all this money to the council, you’re going to get it through’.”

Mr Dunn said that was “not the case at all”.

Councillor Bentley said: “You can talk to architects and developers, you can talk to private people.

“The perception is out there.

“Why do the review if you didn’t believe there was the perception in the first place?

Mr Dunn said: “The perception was very much from Mrs Smith receiving a notification to say ‘There’s a planning application around the corner’, receiving correspondence from apT and asking ‘Who are apT?’

“That was the issue I came across and felt needed to be addressed.”

Committee chairman Chris Turley said Councillor Bentley had made his point, and added that that section of the meeting was only to discuss the rebrand.

“Well I’m saying it isn’t going to make any difference,” Councillorr Bentley said.

Mr Dunn said offering paid-for pre-application advice prevented backlogs of “months if not years, as at some local authorities in this region”.

“The view of architects and so on is that we have a very clear process and they welcome working with us on that basis,” he said.