One of the hardest things to get to grips with, after being elected to Teignbridge District Council, is planning.

There is a strong legal framework which officers are required to act within, much of this is the National Planning policy Framework. The officer’s recommendation to approve or refuse must be based on these policies, failure to do that would likely result in an appeal being lodged. If TDC lost and were found not to have followed the legal framework, there could be consequences for the officer, for TDCs reputation, and for public money, plus the application would be approved anyway.

This is why all our comments on planning proposals will carry more weight if they are in line with policies in the national policy, local plan (created by Teignbridge District Council), or a neighbourhood plan (created usually by the parish council) and our submissions should reference the applicable policies clearly.

The officers are required in NPPF (paragraph 38) to “work proactively with the applicant”. So it is clear that the officers should, in fact are required to, discuss the progress of the application with the applicant.

The presumption of approval and the strong appeals process put in place by Conservative national government do mean that officers need to be sure of their ground when recommending refusal. For the officer to make a recommendation they must show that they have taken into account all valid considerations. Suppose additional objections are made at a late stage, and the applicant says they can respond, but the officer proceeded to recommended refusal without waiting for further response from the applicant. The applicant could claim in appeal that the refusal was influenced by the late objection, and they couldn’t respond. This can make it difficult for TDC to reach a point where a recommendation can be made.

Sometimes an officer’s recommendation is referred to the planning committee, made up of councillors. These councillors also have a legal framework to follow, for example they are required to make their decision based on the evidence presented in the meeting. If a councillor had already decided, they would be “pre-determined”. If a councillor spoke publicly against or in favour of an application before the meeting, or if they supported or opposed the application in the planning portal, they would be barred from taking part in the planning committee decision.
Councillors and now also parish councils can request that an application be brought to committee. 
If a recommendation is not made within the prescribed time frame, or an agreed extension, the applicant has the right to appeal on the grounds of non determination.

In an appeal, the National Planning Inspectorate will take into account all the submissions already made, including the officers report from TDC. all those individuals would be contacted again, offering a further chance to submit.

In my opinion, planning policies such as the local and neighbourhood plans, are an excellent way for communities to influence the type of development they want, but the process is a little stacked in favour of the developer. The recent government whitepaper on planning reforms indicates the government would like to make approvals easier, and objections more difficult. I have contributed to the government consultation stating the need for communities to be listened to on contentions planning applications. We shall see how policy develops.