Planning appeals are becoming simpler, provided everyone submits a complete dossier before discovering what the question was. From 1 April, most applications made to local planning authorities that later reach an appeal through written representations will follow a new route. The site plan has found its pen and is trying to look as though this was always the masterplan.
Under the new approach, the majority of written representation appeals will accept only the evidence submitted to the local authority during the original application. The stated aim is to speed up appeals, keep decisions local and encourage applicants to provide the full body of evidence at the beginning.
This gives every planning application the atmosphere of a final exam taken before the subject has been announced. Applicants must provide enough information for a decision, an appeal and the later discovery that somebody forgot the drainage diagram. A folder on the desk has called this an early mover advantage, despite being opened three weeks after the deadline.
The logic is admirably tidy. First, provide the evidence. Then, the authority considers it. If the decision is challenged, the appeal can usually work from the same material instead of inviting a second parade of documents from people who have just noticed the first parade existed.
That does not mean every appeal will use the same procedure. Appellants can indicate whether they think written representations, a hearing or an inquiry would be appropriate, and explain why. The Planning Inspectorate still decides which route applies, using the existing criteria, and can keep that choice under review during the appeal.
This matters because planning disputes do not all arrive in the same shape. Some require a hearing. Some require an inquiry. Some require 400 pages proving that a hedge is both present and emotionally available. The site plan has pointed at one boundary and declined to comment until it has seen the supporting evidence.
The Inspectorate will maintain both the current and updated procedural guides while applications made before 1 April continue through the earlier arrangements. This is sensible, although the filing cabinet now contains two versions of the future and one of them is still technically correct.
The reform promises speed by making the first stage carry more of the weight. The site plan has put its pen somewhere safe, submitted a full statement explaining where, and is now waiting for an inquiry into whether the statement counts as evidence. It has also requested permission to appeal the decision to look for the pen.
Source: GOV.UK.
