Food for thought
So many clients want to ensure that no one objects to their proposal. This seems to stretch from extensions to minor developments – the larger house builders and commercial developers anticipate objections.
But what does that mean in reality? Consultation comments are a vital part of the planning process. They bring the day-to-day reality to the case officer, helping them understand the ‘on the ground’ experience.
That doesn’t mean planning permission will be refused but that careful consideration can be given to local impacts. It will also likely dictate the determination route, whether it is a delegated decision or a committee decision.
Individuals are not always going to be impartial or aware of planning policy, so while they are a vital part of the process they are not necessarily determinative.
Objections should be weighed in the planning balance, not due to their number but based on the validity of the grounds they make. If robust planning grounds are advanced, then they can assist the case officer in making a decision – but they need to be focused and relevant.
So what is the best approach?
From a developer perspective, public engagement is a positive step to take prior to the submission of an application, depending on the scale of the scheme. It’s not a legal requirement but it does help residents understand the proposal and invariably reduces objections to a scheme.
Public consultation can also help the developer. If it’s done at the right time in the evolution of a scheme, comments from residents can help evolve a scheme to address some, if not all, of residents’ concerns.
The Takeaway
Ultimately, successful outcomes in the planning process rely on a clear understanding of planning policy, the risks, and the planning balance. While consultation doesn’t guarantee support—or prevent objection—it does provide valuable insight that can improve a scheme and guide its evolution.
Even before the concept of grey belt was introduced, planning was invariably grey; it often comes down to interpretation, application of policy and case law. It should not be determined based on ‘who shouts loudest’.
Engaging and responding thoughtfully can make all the difference in navigating this inherently complex—and often subjective—system.
