Refusal of Planning Consent

Not all developments can comply fully with all highway standards and it is often the case that a balanced decision must be made against the impact of a development, compared to its existing lawful use. This may include consideration of the net traffic generation implications of a development and the quality of the present facilities compared to those that are proposed. In these cases it is particularly important that the comparisons are made in a methodical and justifiable manner that allows a clear judgement of the developments impact and benefits to be established by the Planning Inspector. This evidence is normally drawn from the Transport Assessment/Transport Statement or Travel Plan which may then be augmented by any additional evidence to rebut the specific reasons for refusal.

To support its decision and reasons for refusal the Local Planning Authority produces its own evidence which, where highway issues are involved, will normally require the input of the Highway Development Control or Traffic Engineer. Once evidence has been submitted to the Inspectorate it is exchanged between parties and it is possible for comments to then be made to the Inspectorate as a rebuttal of the evidence submitted.

The above process also applies to third party objectors who submit written evidence in support of their “highway concerns” over the development and the Highway Engineer normally provides a response to these objections even if they do not follow the specific reasons for refusal of the Local Planning Authority.

Together with the examining of all written evidence the Inspector will visit the Appeal site and will form their own view on the merits of the case and report accordingly their decision.

Local Hearing

In the local hearing procedure the above is followed as a written statement of the evidence that both parties will produce or draw on at the hearing. It is normal at hearings for the Inspector to have read the supporting evidence and to have visited the site before opening the hearing. The Inspector will then advise the parties on what key issues they wish to discuss and will ask the parties to state their case. From this the Inspector led discussion will begin in which, in addition to the Local Planning Authority and the Appellant, third parties can also voice their views. It is usual for the Appellant to be supported by their Highway Engineer who will be directly involved in the discussions and prior to the hearing will have provided the written evidence.

Hearings are normally followed by a second Inspector site visit at which the Inspector can, if they choose, continue the discussions on site and ask the parties to explain or clarify any matter arising from the hearing. The Inspector will again form their view on the merits of the case and report accordingly their decision at a later date.