Applications / Peer Review

Peer Review of a Planning Report

An independent read of someone else's planning work. Whether you commissioned it, received it from an applicant, or are about to be cross-examined on it, we tell you where the reasoning holds and where it does not.

Who asks for this

Municipalities reviewing a planning justification report filed in support of an application they are not persuaded by. Landowners and ratepayer groups facing a development they want tested. Counsel preparing for a hearing who need the other side's evidence assessed before they commit to a position.

And occasionally applicants, before they file, who would rather find the weak point themselves than have the Tribunal find it.

What the review actually tests

Whether the policy framework cited is the one that applies, current, and read correctly. Whether the conclusions follow from the analysis or simply assert it. Whether the comparators and precedents are genuinely comparable. Whether the material facts are complete or the omissions are doing quiet work.

It is not a rewrite and it is not an opposing report. It is an assessment of whether the document supports what it claims to support.

What you get

A memorandum setting out the findings issue by issue, with the specific paragraphs and policies at stake, and a plain conclusion on the weight the report can reasonably carry.

Where it would help, we will also set out the questions worth putting to the author. If the report is sound, we will tell you that, which is frequently the most useful outcome.

Quoted separately

scoped to the document and the deadline · fixed fee, confirmed before work begins

Get a Quote

See the full pricing schedule.

FAQ

Common questions

An independent Registered Professional Planner reads another planner's report and assesses whether the analysis supports the conclusions. It covers policy, evidence, comparators and completeness, and it results in a written memorandum rather than a competing report.

Usually yes, and it is often efficient. Where the review is intended to be independent, for example a municipal peer review, we will say at the outset what role we can take afterward so nobody is surprised later.

Yes. Reviewing witness statements and expert reports before a hearing is a common use, and the output is generally a memorandum plus the lines of questioning worth putting to the author.

Then the memorandum says so. Confirming that a report is sound is a legitimate result and it is often what a client most needs to know before deciding how to proceed.