#1422 William H, 25 November 2022, 18:53
It seems to me that the above scenario is against the main thrust of the NPPF; to speed up the grant of planning permission “without delay”. A site should be determined on its own merits by the LPA rather than perpetuating planning by appeal. Am I wrong?
#1423 Damian, 26 November 2022, 15:50
If you’re not happy with that, you can Appeal on the basis of a non-determination. That is on the assumption and basis your target date has expired. But bear in mind the Appeal process is not a quick process.
#1445 William H, 12 December 2022, 12:03
Thanks for the response. In this case I'm the owner/appelant of the neighbouring site (lets call it site a) I’m not the applicant on the site that’s been put on hold (site b). My concern is that currently the LPA by their own calculations have 4.9 years supply and should grant consent on site b. Once site b is consented, site a is an obvious rounding off of the settlement area and the inspectors decision on site a is very much easier to make. My question is are LPAs really allowed to pause decision making like this whilst waiting for neighbouring appeal decisions and/or the 5YHLS situation to change? It seems to me site b, which was validated a year ago now, should be determined as and when the LPA have the capacity to do so rather than strategically being put on hold until such a time as the tilted balance can be disengaged or the decision can be influenced by a neighbouring site. The NPPF does use the phrase “without delay” not when it suits the LPA. Am I wrong? I would be interested to hear from those with more experience than myself before making a fuss.
#1446 Damian, 14 December 2022, 00:21
The LPA can prolong or delay the determination of the application. As you’re not the applicant, there isn’t really anything you can do about it.
Have you spoken to or informed your Local Councillor?