Appeal Ready

0:00Planners, we get it. Delivering great places starts with strong foundations. That's where RichBurrow comes in. We help landowners navigate the planning system and a point-to-development partner in order to bring new homes to the market quickly. Our approach ensures value for all using design codes for high-quality places where communities thrive. RichBurrow, securing land, planning and value. Find out more at richburrow.co.uk Hello listeners, Sam Stafford here.

1:10Tuesday lunchtime, early March 2026. I am reporting from my bench adjacent to the Ryburn Reservoir, which is not far from Stafford Towers on the edge of Rippenden in West Yorkshire. And it is an absolutely glorious day listeners. The first for a while it feels. World War III might have kicked off in the Gulf, but there is no sense of that here in the sunny South Pennines. So yes, I'm at home today. I might actually be at home all week, which is unusual. But I was in Manchester last week and took the opportunity to catch up with friends of the podcast, Lisa Tai, Andrew Johnston and Louise Fountain, to discuss some of the issues of the day. Lisa is a planning lawyer at town legal. Andrew founded consultancy, made it together. And Louise is an associate director in the Urban Design team at SLR.

2:12In a conversation recorded at Reform Radio, we talked about the imminent changes to appeal guidance. We talked about the design and place making PPG. We talked about affordable housing delivery and the misalignment between Holmes England's grant funding and section 106 requirements. We went back to design and place making to talk about design review. And towards the end, we talked about LPA's charging for invalid applications. The general theme of the discussion though, and hence the title of this episode, was set by a phrase that Lisa used at the start of the discussion, and which seems to capture the mood of the moment, certainly as far as the development industry is concerned. I will be back at the end for a little bit more waffle, but, and after this jingle, it is Lisa that kicks things off.

3:16I would say the kind of the biggest phrase that we hear at the minute is being appeal ready. So, you know, get an application in that is appeal ready. And that's keeping us busy. Which is interesting in the context of the changes to the appeal. The new guidance. Because being appeal ready now, or being ready for your appeal to be downgraded to written reps, although I'm sure that the schemes that you're dealing with are probably not in that kind of territory. But the commentary that I've seen around that with shout outs to Nicolagooch and Zack Simon's and others is very difficult to be appeal ready if you're anticipating an appeal against non-determination. Yeah, I think the guidance does split out. There's a route to go down if you are going to be

4:23refused. So, if you've been refused, you're in a certain way of being determined via written reps. If you are a non-determination appeal, you obviously won't have a committee report, so you won't know what you're arguing against. You won't know what your reasons for refusal are. But I'm not sure that makes that much of a difference if you go into your application process with the view that you're going to appeal, because it's all about having an application that ticks every box that you would need to tick for determination. Yeah, I think for us, when we're advising clients, you might not have the luxury of being able to bolt on bits as you go through the process. And it's often the temptation when you're up against a deadline for a submission of like, we've got what we have now. Let's make that submission. We can deal with consultancy comments as they come through. And there's the risk now of doing that, because if you do that and then you do find yourself in a situation where you're in appeal and you can't add onto that, you've looked out. And speaking with some sort of local

5:29authority planners, I have sort of a sympathy for understanding where they don't get the full picture and that appeal that hit with this in loads more information, this sort of view that's often sort of given back to me. So for them to have it all up front into term and it would be a lot easier. So you can see the benefit for both sides to introduce that to have an appeal ready application from the outset. I think it puts some pressure on local authorities as well, because it means if they're going to refuse, they need to be sure that their committee report deals with everything. Quite a lot of refusals are done by delegated as well. And sometimes you delegated reports and not that detailed and don't contain that much information. So I think that appeal ready point applies just as much to local authorities. And I think it puts some pressure on them to make sure that their refusals are actually up to scratch, because they're not going to get the opportunity to revisit either. And I think where it favors a balance is where you have a recommendation for

6:33approval. Yes. And you find yourself in a situation where you've been overturned at committee where the reasons aren't such right. And then there isn't the ability for them to bolster that. You've just got the pack of information. I don't know how they deal with that in fact. If there is a refusal, which hasn't been referenced in the office's report in the first place, how does that, how do you square that? I've seen some commentary that suggests that that will mean that local authorities where they know that at committee they're going to refuse they'll differ or they will, you know, take a little while to come up with their reasons for refusal and make those then as detailed as possible, because that then becomes effectively the case that they're running. What's the dynamic there when it comes to what the scheme actually looks like in that context, either whether you're under time pressure or information pressure to prepare something that's got the best chance, but at the same time is quite fluid.

7:33Yeah, I think there's a risk that the quality of the application might not be as strong if you're rushing things in terms of appeal. Because you've got to tell a story now. Yeah, the narrative is really important. More important as a result of the draft PPG I've picked upon. Yeah, definitely. And design code is something I've been working on at the moment within very tight timescales, which is different to appeals, but to homes England funding deadlines. So that's been quite interesting to look at how that's possible to achieve some of those homes England funding deadlines as well. But yeah, it's been a focus for me, it's design codes. So I wanted to touch on on the new draft design and place making planning practice guidance. It's changed quite a lot from the national model design code. There's been a few shifts now in the thinking. So just to really run through through that now and unpack that a little bit.

8:37So the national model design code I think was more sort of checklist orientated. And now with this new guidance, there's more of a shift to thinking about things in more systems approach and joined up thinking into disciplinary thinking between various aspects. So that that's positive. And I think that means that there's also more flexibility with design codes. So that would allow for that narrative to come through more strongly and also welcome more innovation at reserve matters stage. There need to be appeal ready. And I wonder whether maybe there will be more on design and place making as authorities look to justify the decisions that are being taken against officer recommendation. I think on a few schemes, I can think of where we're already experiencing that. And so if you think about a grey belt applications, a few that we're

9:40having in the moment and the quantity comments coming back in. And urban design will always be one of those. Typically, well, on all of them, in fact, there are outline plan applications with all matters reserved because they are seeking to establish the principle. So our response on noses noted, but they are elements that will be dealt with at reserve matters. So the ability to get into the weeds and the detail of the design actually is fairly limited on an outline. And I suspect most of these grey belt applications we're talking about will fall into that category. All sites have their own quirks and their own differences, don't they? So whether it is about design and visual impact of things that are around and about the site or whether it's the density given what the authority require in a particular area. The details of affordable housing, tenure, can come up even at that outline stage. So there's quite, there's actually I think quite a

10:42lot that is needed to get to a position where you have an application that you can then stand in front of an inspector without any further changes or being able to improve any bit of it. There's actually quite a lot of work. And sometimes that can be a council of perfection because you want to give yourself the absolute best chance of getting a yes on appeal. So at the stage where you pre-determination, you could throw quite a lot at it to get it appeal ready or appeal ready could just be your bare minimum and hope that it goes through. So there's quite a spectrum really of things that you can do, but it does feel like the design type issues, are things that an authority can go for relatively easily because they're so subjective. So it's then very hard. But then if you're at an appeal, you're in front of an inspector again who will have a subjective opinion of their own. So if the design codes feel to me like a way

11:49that authorities could try and impose a requirement on applications and give them reasons to refuse if something's not in accordance or they won't sign up to that as part of a condition. So do you think it would be a helpful tool in that situation considering if more people are taking their applications to appeal? Is it going to put more pressure on local authorities to go through that process? Having looked at the design and place-making guidance, I think what's really good about it is I think it's a brilliant document. I think it's really well laid out. It's quite engaging and it's a policy document. It's just a really difficult thing to do. And also has the ability for more, say, lay people who don't have design qualifications to understand it a bit more. I think as an applicant you can point to things within that document certainly within the first part and say look we've done that and we've done this, that's what's asked for. So I think that then makes it harder for if accounts are looking to

12:53refuse them. So you're actually pointing to a government document that's helpful in that sense. So if you're looking to depart from that you will then have to provide more justification and that's when you'll need a really thorough zone access statement. There's always an administrative master plan on that out line anyway. There'll be some parameter plans. So I think that's what we advise applicants at the outset is whether it's a peel ready or I think we in before this sort of it was like the game is always to get enough as a recommendation because that bits in your control. I think once it gets for members you're sort of the lap of the god slightly. So that's what we aim for and then I think that's a line with a peel ready anyway in any case. Tyler Grange are a multi-award winning environmental consultancy specialising in our

13:54borrower culture, ecology, landscape planning and green and blue infrastructure. With offices across the UK we've been supporting clients to deliver housing, commercial, infrastructure and renewable projects for 15 years. We provide guidance from inception to completion and believe collaboration is key to realising exceptional schemes. See Tyler Grange.co.uk forward slash 50 shades to see our work in action. On the basis of buttons have been pushed, golden rules aren't an issue. 15% more affordable housing and because that's why that's what I hear about frozen north that a authorities are benefiting from transition arrangements and housing numbers are still relatively low and therefore presumptions aren't being, the balances aren't being tilted but even when they are you 15% affordable without any viability discussion is putting the

15:00moccas on some prospective grey belt sites. viability is a challenge even at policy level I think for some sites in the north. So yeah it does I think for grey belt housing applications in the north that does put an additional pressure where viability is already challenging. There's quite a lot of schemes coming forward though conversely with greater proportions of affordable housing because there is certain types of funding available and certain funding streams that actually enable greater levels of affordable housing but then how the local authorities then treat those and whether they take that affordable housing as a benefit is actually a little bit of a challenge because they're seeing it as well you're getting that anyway because you've got funding for it so we're not necessarily taking it as a benefit of the scheme.

16:02There's some weird things happening in the north when you've got policies that are actually seem more designed for areas where viability isn't as challenging. I think in the viability context it all starts at the local plan preparation stage for me and I don't think there's nearly enough scrutiny of viability at that stage. So what so you set understandably the local plan stages and need to deliver we're talking about housing mainly and infrastructure sit alongside that and that's what the the local plan should be doing and as part of that it'll be allocating challenging sites that will have viability difficulties and they may be brownfield or tainted and they'll be an expectation and a more than expectation of policy that links those things but if that's wrong from the outset you then set this bar of expectation which will inevitably lead to a reengagement of viability through the application and that's what I talk about where every single scheme

17:05this is happening so it's like that to me is it's a fundamental issue from the outset not just worn off so I don't think developers are looking to game it I think it's just that's the that's the way that the local plan the planet system is set up at the moment. Yeah and my understanding of the current consultation is that actually the there is less wiggle room to go back to assumptions made at a local plan when making an individual application then is the case at the minute which seems which seems suboptimal given that a local plan is making is trying to set a kind I mean there'll be a different affordable requirements there might be four affordable requirements across four different character areas of a burrow or what have you you know 40% affordable there in 10% affordable there in 20 and 30 somewhere else but even so that can't capture all of the circumstances pertaining at that point

18:09in time nor all of the circumstances pertaining in the future both across the burrow and affecting all of those individuals so you have to you have to set a bar and then allow applicants to revisit if it's not in accordance and that's how the system works and it's kind of working it's kind of working it's kind of working yeah I think it's yeah it's a utopian vision I think that we could have everything somehow crystal ball gazed at local plant stage and fixed and everybody would abide by that and it would be great if if that was possible but it I agree with you it things it's too far in advance of one site so coming forward there are things that won't be known about sites at that point at local plant stage that factor into the viability of the site actually being I think my point was more around affordable housing delivery and it can be there's a prefers situation in some authorities and on some sites where there is grant funding available

19:14to deliver more affordable housing outside of section 106 yeah yeah so if the and the ambition is to deliver more affordable but in order to do that you have to demonstrate that the site's unviable first to access that grant funding that's not I don't think through there's there's lots of workarounds I'm sure you're doing it a little bit a lot and and it just about works or there could be and there could be an acknowledgement that this is a route that everyone accepts and you don't have to go through that process things don't talk to each other do they the home thing when grant funding regime doesn't talk to the local authorities section 106 and I mean it that in a legal sense rather than in people actually talking to each other but they don't they don't fit together so you do end up having to come up with daft workarounds that don't reflect the reality of what's being delivered on the ground so the section 106 bit I don't fully say to be a pill ready you have to have the 106 also

20:15signed yeah well what not signed ready well signed executed for written reps appeal but that's that's all it already says that in the guy that's not new the written reps appeals that's what it's that's what it says and and yeah if it's something relatively straightforward you can do a unilateral undertaking and that's you know quite easy to do but where it's something that needs engagement with the local authority you even on schemes where it's heading for approval we have real difficulties getting local authority officers to instruct their lawyers to you know it's starting to be written into PPAs and it's it's you know there's promises being made about engagement but the reality on the ground is very few and far between to get a local authority lawyer even where they use an external lawyers to actually engage ahead of a committee it looks like it's first of April

21:17as changes for applications from the first of April yeah I mean this what do you think that looks like you know three months after that or you know six months after that I'm not sure what's going to change to to get local authorities to start to engage in that way to help to help you as an applicant who might be heading for a refusal to talk to you about the the 106 and that and the blame isn't necessarily on the lawyers the blade you know the local authority lawyers they're not they don't have instructions from their planning officers it's that the whole it comes back to the whole local authority resource point where do they you know how best do they spend their time I think it's a really tricky I can't see how you square that right now it's hard enough when it's recommended for approval and there's a delay it's hard enough when it's recommended for approval and you've got the committee resolution so resolution so I can think of examples now months later and you're still just you're still chasing weekly emails if you're if you're trying to be efficient and moving forward

22:24with an appeal at pace and it's out of your control and I still I imagine that the majority of written reps appeals given given the you know the kind of projects that you are all working on are of a certain scale for a certain client base and there is the scope to be appeal ready if you throw enough you know kind of resource at it but the majority of written reps appeals will not be being submitted by project teams of that scale and where with all you know there might be small architecture practices or you know what have you I'm you know given the what I imagine the majority of written reps appeals are for not major development it will be people who are trying to navigate the system without the heft of bringing you know yeah experts like you all to bear is it actually quicker to go to appeal then with an application is that the view of some developers

23:24but it's actually quicker to take a search for the lpdf bore out last year yeah because because the coming back to the 106 discussions and appeal creates a hard deadline and that it focuses minds and you know yeah I think it is true that you can you can then it shows that the discussions can be had and concluded within a reasonable time scale whereas once you've got the resolution to grant it can be a bit open ended it feels like maybe that needs to be managed then because there just could be too many appeals for local authorities to deal with and if like you say they're not all teams that are ready and have the material it just adds pressure and further delays it's a live issue isn't it and it talking to officers again like talking to officers weekly you know daily and this is on certainly on their mind the funding how they fund appeals as well did you see there's that authority that spent their budget they allocated a manual budget and that

24:27was spent within the first four months chair well yeah it's a tough one isn't it because you sort of you're trying to budget for something and you don't know again just if you're the appellant you have a degree of control over how many pills you make and you win you make them but as a local authority tap tap it's this thing on i'm Simon Ricketts from specialist planning law firm town legal town legal is delighted to be one of the sponsors of the 50 shades of planning podcast where would we all be Sam without what you do on this platform so it's thank you from me and from all at town legal tap tap what button do i press now yeah there is more emphasis on design code now there's more weight to it

25:37so that's interesting how how that would work and i think there is some considerations around that i think it's positive i mean i would say that as a because you work hard you're involved in why aren't you yeah in places matter design review which is a northwest independent design review panel so i'm one of the chairs for that so of course i would say that i welcome any any advocacy of design review and i do think it has has a value but now within this document there is more weight to that so but i think it's quite interesting in how that would work that there is mention that it could assist local authorities in assessing schemes to see if they meet these design codes so if a design code has been prepared does a reserve matters adhere to a design code design review panel could essentially help assess that and determine that so i'd be quite interested in how that could work i think it may need

26:38some more thoughts about how that would be resourced would it be something that would be a material consideration would a design review panel report be part of a committee report for example and then there's a consideration of how early schemes are brought to panels so sometimes you'll see a scheme quite early and that's great because you can really genuinely impact and and help help the process them and give really good advice which can that can be taken on board but if it's later in the process it can be seen as rubber stamping so if this is something that is going to have more weight then those schemes need to be brought in earlier for review so that's a consideration as well did you um did you see your friend of the podcast Hannah Loftus's Coruscating that's a word isn't it honestly word fancy word for skating um Coruscating with uh architects journal column on design review quality across the country or outside

27:41London yeah it's pretty punchy um i mean obviously design review in the north west is brilliant but what absolutely what is uh i know that reasonable about how much does it cost oh i mean it depends on on the five hundred home tall building scheme or five hundred home extension it depends how many panelists and and things like that that you would have okay i see it as good value because of yeah you you get and really sound advice from from different people and all all in one reports from different it's it's not just architects it's landscape architects urban designers landscape architects architects as well so it's it could be highways it depends on the scheme so i think it is really really good value to add um but it has to be brought in early but design reviews that is i could uh um co-op or uh i don't know how there's all different people who come together there's different types and yeah this is an interesting point because

28:47there are some that have just been sort of been set up independently the one that i'm part of places matter is part of the design network um some local authorities have design review panels as well now sulfur to just set one up um so so there's different types there is the urban design learning guidance on design review and that is referenced in this new um ppg document but that that should be adhered to and is used as guidance i can see how if an authority uh didn't have dedicated urban design resource and you wanted to be appear ready uh and you had the time and there was a design review function available that represented reasonable value it was weighty uh it had you know um a reputation locally that authorities took it into account i can see how you would go through that process get a reading endorsement

29:53and then be able to say to uh stand up at committee and say you've got no plan you've got no land supply uh it's not best and most versatile agricultural land there are no heritage considerations this is the most sensible site on edge of the most sustainable location in your borough and with bean through design review so refuse it on design grounds if you absolutely know if you dare i can see the case for that but if it's patchy and you haven't got you know if you have if that facility isn't available it doesn't seem it doesn't seem ubiquitous it doesn't seem equitable there are some authorities that will point you very firmly in the direction of design review panels where they have good relationships and they know their members value them and in which case that that is a good example where it makes sense for the applicant to fully know subject to cost and they can be quite expensive i think i'll just give the applicant's sort of take on that where you've already played an application fee and you already employed an architect and a landscape architect and you've built a team and you have a PPA in place and there's it so

30:56there's these additionality of cost that just do uh i'll put over time so but where they do work where you get where design review panels can point to improvements to schemes as a result of the dialogue that's good and then that can be a story in the narrative that you tell when you go to committee and you come and lie on yeah i think the implementation uh weighed up against the ambition of this document's quite interesting and how how this will now affect things going forward because it it's all there in the in the document whether it's adopted it is draft at the moment for comment but if it is adopted how will some of this be implemented for example the the the design of you is one part of that how how would that be enforced is it is it viable because of the reasons you've just mentioned it could be another cost how how much can we expect that to to see happen you've seen the local authority that's penalising applications that are made in valid

32:02yes that's interesting isn't it i mean it gives me cold sweats as a consultant because i think if you get if you don't you're not able to get the application validated in the first place well i mean get that i mean that speaks to the point about who's who's making the you know the professional team is just putting these things together although i did see so that example is BCP isn't it born with Christ church and pool and i did see that that was replacing 47 individual checklists for types of different types of development or something so is it any wonder than a single arc you know one man the one woman one person every day sexism a one person architectural firm is struggling to navigate 47 checklist because they can't work out whether or not that type of development falls over here or over here or so on and so forth i actually think it's harder for the smaller applications and where you it's a bit unclear and also proportionate is it proportionate to ask for it on a smaller scheme it might not be and there might be a cost involved in it it could be could just as well be a dealt with as a condition possibly

33:07so you can see why sometimes there's it's not completely clear always as to what needs to go with application at the start yes and and they know circumstances it seems harsh to be able to say this is invalid and you or and we're going to charge you but then it's that lawful under the regs is that actually when i read when i read the article i was trying to find what power they were relying on to do this because it says it's if it's invalid because you haven't done a wind study or whatever and then you provide the wind study is there not a legal requirement to validate it i don't i mean arguments about validation are really hard because what's your only remedy is to judicially review the the local authority for not validating your application i have some i have sympathy with authorities dealing with applications that are clearly sub-par i have sympathy with applicants who are dealing with you know trying to pin jelly to a wall because the

34:10junior officer said it's fine it goes up the tree and a senior officer says no we insist upon this and all of that kind of you know all of that kind of all of that kind of thing is this the right way forward to deal with that i'm not i'm not sure i think it's a symptom of a system that is under massive strain yeah and and it's an it's an attempt to protect officers time so that it's ready so they are actually looking at the substance of an application not whether it's a complete fully piece of document that they can review yet and a lot of that validation is is done through more technicians and even now AI does this move towards just for computers to be and it gets you back to it gets you back to cost recovery and in under i can see the motivation to get closer to full cost recovery pending locally set fees but then the the mppf is kind of predicated on getting meaningful substantive pre-out that pins down you know what this is more relevant

35:15to things that people in this room are not that involved in the smaller schemes the less professional teams always you know speaking to officers again i just think to get an insight from their side of how many 95% of applications being on that scale not the bigger yeah agreed well four three things you hello listeners Sam again my thanks to Lisa Andrew and Louise it was very nice to see you all in the description you will find links to blogs by Nikola Gooch and Simon Ricketts on the changes to appeal guidance there is a link to the consultation on the design and place making

36:18ppg if you are going to respond and have not yet done so please be aware that the consultation closes a few days after this episode has been published whether you are responding or not there is also a link to some observations on the consultation material that Vicki Payne shared on LinkedIn and that you may find helpful on the design review front there is a link to that co-rescating architects journal piece penned by Hannah Loftus a few other bits and pieces got to mention during the discussion so just for completeness there is a link to the lich fields research that found that since the 2019 Rosewell review it has been on average six months quicker for a decision at appeal than locally which is remarkable when you stop to think about it there is a link to a story about cheerwell using its one hundred thousand pounds annual budget for appeals in four months

37:18and there is a link to a story about Bournemouth Christchurch and Paul charging for invalid applications all right then any other business what else can i tell you listeners i will be doing a turn at the Hertfordshire Infrastructure and Development Board at Hatfield House on the 11th of March i might see some of you there and i will be at the launch of a new BPF report on the industrial and logistics sector in the big smoke on the 19th of March i might see some of you there also i think that's all i have to mention this time to matters of housekeeping Lisa Andrew and Louise have already qualified for a 50 Shades mug that you can too listeners if i spot that you have shared the podcast on one of your social platforms that's right plugs mean mugs if you have enjoyed the episode do please also consider bolstering my fragile

38:18self esteem by leaving the podcast a nice rating and a nice review wherever you listen to it obviously though if you have not enjoyed it then please do not leave a review but do please feel free to let me know why you haven't enjoyed it feedback is always welcome you can contact me via samstafford at hotmail.com 50 Shades of Planning is the podcast by planners and four planners so if you would like to use it as a platform for sharing anything you think that we need to be talking about then you are very welcome to get in touch with me if you are a new listener do please check out the back catalog where you will find episodes on myriad planning topics as well as the hitting the high notes and all around the world series the former is town planning's equivalent of desert island discs and the latter is Paul Smith's exploration of planning systems in other countries and do remember that by subscribing new episodes will magically appear in your phone as soon as I

39:21have published them. My thanks to Rich Bra, Town Legal and Tyler Grange for supporting the podcast to Vistry for sponsoring the 50 Shades Mugs to Mike Dunbar at Reform Radio for recording this episode and to Adrian Mian at Soho Radio for editing it. What have we learnt? Well as regular listeners will know town and country planning is very much not a black and white endeavour there are at least 50 Shades in between. My thanks to you for listening all the way to the very end I am very much obliged. There will be another episode long soon but bye for now.

41:00Delivering employment land starts with the right location and that's where Rich Bra commercial comes in. We work across the UK to unlock and promote commercial land helping landowners secure planning and connecting developers with the best located sites. With strategic planning expertise we deliver sustainable employment and mixed-use sites that drive economic growth. Rich Bra commercial securing land planning and value. Find out more at richbarrer.co.uk.