000			01453cam a2200265 4500
001			ABS63208
008			000000n2000 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u109551
100			_aStubbs, M
245			_aInformality and the planning appeal by hearing method
260			_c2000
490			_aTown Planning Review _v71(3) July 2000, 245-267(23)
520			_aReview of user satisfaction with the informal hearing method of planning appeal, used as alternative to the public inquiry. Provides a background to the hearing method, outlining its use within dispute resolution, and considers the landmark decision in "Dyason v SoS Environment and Chiltern DC" which raised the notion that an informal hearing is not necessarily fair. Discusses research findings from a questionnaire survey sent to planning professionals: participants were asked to comment on their perception and experience of informal hearings. The research reveals a general approval of the hearing method, which dispels the notion that professionals are wary of informality. References.
590			_aABS
650			_aPLANNING APPEALS
650			_aPUBLIC INQUIRIES
650			_aINFORMAL HEARINGS
650			_aDYASON V SOS ENVIRONMENT AND ANOTHER
650			_aPLANNING CONSULTANTS
650			_aLOCAL AUTHORITIES
650			_aSURVEYS
650			_aPUBLIC OPINION
690			_aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
942			_n0
999			_c65402 _d65402