PREVIOUS DECISION LETTERS & PLANNING APPEALS

By
The Use of Inspectors' Decision Letters in Planning Appeals

Those involved in planning appeals often produce the decision letters of planning inspectors to bolster their cases. The argument being, of course, that the previous decision is similar to the one in front of the Inspector and should, therefore, be taken into account. However, the Inspector will often say “Each case on its merits” and place little weight on the decision letter which the party thought to clinch the deal. I many cases, this is because the person producing the decision letter has failed to do enough work. Had he done so, then the Inspector might have placed more weight on the cited decision letter.
Here is a quote from an Inspector in a recent decision letter:
“13. I acknowledge that the appellant has also referred to various successful appeal decisions where lawful development certificates for extended gardens have been granted.  However I have been provided with limited information regarding these cases, including how the scale of the sites compare with that of the present appeal site. “

Appeal Ref: APP/X1355/X/17/3181946 - Wood Cottage, Hesleden Road, Hesleden
The message is clear; namely, that the Inspector should be provided with evidence which shows the background to, and context of, the decision letter which we rely upon.
So what could have been supplied if one is relying on a previous decision letter ?  For a start, a small amount of research should provide copies of the location plans.  The decision rejected by the Inspector in the Wood Cottage appeal was in respect of a site in Clyst Hydon, Devon. A search of the LPA website came up with the location plan:

A tad more research produced an aerial photograph:


The production of these materials would have met the Inspector’s criticism and provided a fighting chance that he would give some weight to the previous decision.
My personal approach is that this exercise should be carried out on every occasion when a decision letter is put in evidence.


Comments

Post a comment

Popular posts from this blog

QUESTIONS ON ENVIRONMENT BILL

By
I recently spoke (if this is the right word) at a webinar on the Environment Bill, hosted by Bath Publishing. We had a good response in terms of questions from delegates (probably not the right word) but could not tackle them all on the day. I have listed them below and will try to answer them all over coming weeks.

SO WATCH THIS SPACE !



Can I just clarify - this Bill is for England only?Do you think local plans will need to demonstrate biodiversity/environmental improvement can be delivered on sites allocated for development to show they are viable, deliverable and developable (10% uplift in biodiversity/environmental improvement)?Where local planning authorities seek to achieve a net gain in biodiversity on current applications, i.e. ahead of the finalising of the Bill, how much weight does their request have when the gain isn't mandatory yet?Could the 'Responsible Person' be the Local Nature Partnership?Apologies if this will be answered later but existing policies allow…
Read more

ON WHY BIODIVERSITY ENHANCEMENT AND BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN AMOUNT TO THE SAME THING.

By
The re-emergence of the Environment Bill has heralded some considerable debate about the proposed statutory enshrinement of the concept of biodiversity net gain.There have been arguments about whether this a good thing or a bad thing.Arguably, those debates are slightly academic because the reality of the situation is that biodiversity net gain is already with us.

In terms of statute we have section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.Section 40(1) provides as follows: “(1) [A] public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity.” A “public authority” includes a Minister of the Crown, a public body, a government department, a local authority and a local planning authority: Section 40(4). Section 40(3) then provides an extended definition of “conserving”: “(3) Conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habita…
Read more

A STRANGE TALE OF STONEHENGE

By
Image
Given that the summer solstice is fast approaching, it provides the excuse to regale those interested in highway law with a tale which comes close to being very strange.

It has to do with culs de sac[1], ancient monuments, the “vulgar public” and too much Latin.
Lord Eversley’s book “Commons, Forests and Footpaths The Story of the Battle During the Last Forty-Five Years for Public Rights Over the Commons, Forests and Footpaths of England and Wales” (Cassell & Co.) was published in 1910. He was the president of the, then, Commons Preservation Society (which later became the Open Spaces Society by merger). In part, the book explains the background to the fencing around Stonehenge and the legal battle which then ensued over it. As a broad generality, it is fair to say that it is difficult to show that a cul de sac is a highway.The problem being, of course, that it is not a through route.The conventional wisdom is that a highway is a route which connects two separate points.The conceptua…
Read more