Applications, appeals, permitted development, enforcement and planning strategy across England
Planning explanations, updates and practical guidance in video form
Editorial standards, sources and corrections
Planning Geek publishes planning news, case-law coverage and practical analysis alongside its wider planning reference site. The aim is simple: tell readers what has happened, link them to the material behind the story and explain why it matters in practice.
Planning can turn on a few words in legislation, a dated notice, the wording of a direction or one paragraph in a judgment. We therefore prefer primary sources and make a point of distinguishing confirmed facts from proposals, commentary and our own analysis.
This page explains how our Planning News is sourced, checked and corrected.
What we publish
Planning Geek covers planning and related development matters, principally in England. News can include changes to legislation and policy, court judgments, planning appeals, Article 4 Directions, Local Plans, nationally significant infrastructure, CIL, permitted development and other decisions that may matter to homeowners, developers, businesses and planning professionals.
We do not try to reproduce every planning story. We would rather publish something when there is a useful Planning Geek angle: a practical consequence, a legal point that is easy to miss, a deadline, a new route through the system or an important distinction between what a headline says and what the underlying document actually does.
Primary sources come first
Wherever possible, we work from the document that creates or records the position rather than somebody else’s summary of it. Depending on the story, that may include:
- legislation and statutory instruments on legislation.gov.uk
- court judgments and official case-law databases
- Planning Inspectorate and Valuation Office decisions
- government consultations, guidance, policy and ministerial statements
- local authority committee reports, decision notices, Local Plan documents and Article 4 Directions
- published plans, maps and supporting evidence
Secondary reporting can be useful for identifying a story or adding context, but it should not replace an available primary source on a point that can be checked directly.
Our wider About Planning Geek page explains the background to the site and consultancy.
Facts, proposals and analysis are kept separate
A proposal is not a decision, a Cabinet recommendation is not an operative Article 4 Direction, and a consultation document is not necessarily the policy that will eventually be adopted. Where timing or legal status matters, we try to say exactly what stage has been reached.
We also distinguish the source material from our interpretation of it. Planning Geek articles often go beyond the announcement and ask what a change means in practice. That analysis is part of the value of the article, but it should not be presented as though it were wording taken from the underlying legislation, judgment or decision.
Where the position is uncertain, disputed or dependent on facts we do not have, we say so.
Headlines should be interesting without changing the story
We want people to read the articles, so headlines are written to make the practical issue clear and to encourage a click. But the article has to deliver what the headline promises.
We avoid inventing deadlines, overstating a proposal as settled law or turning a fact-specific decision into a universal rule. A strong headline is useful; a misleading one is not.
Bylines and responsibility
News articles carry a named author and publication date. Where Ian Walmsley is the named author, his background is set out on the Ian Walmsley biography page.
Ian is the founder of Planning Geek, a planning consultant and property developer. He is not a chartered town planner, and the site does not claim otherwise. Planning Geek’s strength is practical planning experience combined with continual use of legislation, policy, guidance, appeal decisions and case law.
Corrections and updates
Planning information changes. Councils publish revised papers, directions are made or confirmed, judgments are handed down and government guidance is amended. We update stories and reference pages when a later document changes the position.
If we find a factual error, we correct it. Where the correction materially changes the meaning of an article, the update should be clear in the article rather than quietly preserving a misleading version.
If you think we have got something wrong, please contact Planning Geek and point us to the relevant source if you can. We would much rather correct a mistake than defend one.
Planning Geek is also a consultancy
Planning Geek is both a free planning reference site and a planning consultancy. That commercial relationship is not hidden: the site explains the services available and some pages link to ways of obtaining planning advice.
Editorial conclusions should not be changed because a story may be commercially convenient or inconvenient. If Planning Geek has a material involvement in a project that is itself the subject of news coverage, that relationship should be disclosed where it is relevant to understanding the article.
General website information is not a substitute for advice on a particular site or set of facts. Our disclaimer explains that distinction in more detail.
Open sources and attribution
Planning Geek frequently links to and explains public-sector material. Where public-sector information is reused under the Open Government Licence, we follow the relevant attribution requirements. We also link readers to official legislation, judgments, decisions and council documents so they can check the source for themselves.
Related Planning Geek pages
Editorial Policy Page Created: 30th August 2026