Planning After April 2026 – Building Appeal-Ready Applications from Day One

From “no second chances” to a different way of working

In our previous article, Planning Appeals After April 2026: No Second Chances, we set out a fundamental shift in the system.

From April 2026, the ability to introduce new evidence at appeal stage is significantly reduced.

That changes the risk profile of every planning application.

It also reinforces a position we have held for some time:

Applications need to be appeal-ready at the point of submission.

The question is how that is actually achieved in practice.

Moving from reactive to structured planning strategy

Traditionally, many schemes have followed a familiar route:

• Prepare a design

• Submit an application

• Respond to comments

• If refused, strengthen the case at appeal

That approach is becoming increasingly risky.

What we are now seeing across live projects is that:

The strength of the original submission is often decisive.

If the justification is not there at the start, there may not be an opportunity to fix it later.

A more evidence-led approach

At TMDP, this has led to a shift in how we approach planning work.

We are now placing much greater emphasis on:

• Understanding how Inspectors are deciding comparable cases

• Testing proposals against recent appeal decisions

• Building justification that aligns with real outcomes, not just policy wording

This is not about theory.

It is about grounding applications in actual decision-making behaviour.

What recent appeal decisions are telling us

Looking at appeal decisions across heritage, hospitality, rural and constrained sites, a number of consistent themes are emerging.

Heritage – justification matters more than harm alone

Less than substantial harm is often acceptable in principle.

But Inspectors are consistently looking for:

• A clear and viable future use

• A well-evidenced public benefit

• A coherent explanation of why the harm is justified

Where schemes fail, it is often not the level of harm itself.

It is the absence of a properly structured justification.

Pubs and hospitality – evidence is critical

Loss of pubs and community uses continues to be heavily scrutinised.

Appeal decisions show that:

• Without robust viability evidence, change of use proposals are unlikely to succeed

• Where viability is properly evidenced, Inspectors are prepared to support alternative uses

This is a key area where early strategic input makes a significant difference.

Green Belt – clarity and structure are key

Green Belt remains restrictive, but not absolute.

Successful schemes tend to demonstrate:

• Clearly defined very special circumstances

• A combination of benefits, rather than a single argument

• A well-structured planning balance

Where this is not done properly, refusals are consistently upheld.

Rural sites – understanding realistic outcomes

Appeal decisions continue to show a clear distinction:

• Conversions of existing buildings are generally supported where policy tests are met

• New isolated dwellings remain challenging unless there is a genuine functional or policy-based justification

This is often an area where early advice can prevent abortive work.

The key point – planning should start with strategy

One of the most common issues we still see is projects beginning with drawings.

Layouts are prepared, designs developed, and only then is the planning position fully considered.

The reality is:

Planning should start with strategy, not design.

That means:

• Identifying risks early

• Understanding how similar cases have been decided

• Building a robust, evidence-led justification before submission

What this means for clients

For clients, this approach provides:

• A clearer understanding of risk from the outset

• Better informed decision-making

• A stronger, more defensible application

It also avoids the increasingly common situation where:

• An application is refused

• And there is limited opportunity to recover the position at appeal

A more robust way of working

At TMDP, our focus is on:

• Getting the application right first time

• Aligning proposals with both policy and precedent

• Ensuring that submissions are capable of standing up at appeal

This is not about overcomplicating the process.

It is about applying the right level of thinking at the right stage.

Final thought

The planning system has not necessarily become harder.

But it has become less forgiving.

A well-prepared application has always mattered.

Now, it is critical.

Speak to TMDP

If you are working on a site that is constrained, sensitive or uncertain, we are always happy to have an initial discussion.

📞 0116 467 0055

Planning | Heritage | Design | Project Management