SeagullTwo
UserSkills for Claude to work with UK planning applications — retrieve documents from council portals, triage the grounds, and draft well-founded representations on ecology, transport, heritage and flood-risk. England-focused. Not legal advice.
Categories
Indexed Skills (24)
application-triage-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Given a UK planning application, work out which material planning considerations are actually engaged and which representation skill(s) to run (ecology, transport, heritage, flood risk, …), in what priority order — or advise that there is no strong ground to object. The router for the planning representation skills. England-focused. Not legal advice; human review required.
ecological-representation-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Evaluate the ecological evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Ecological Impact Assessment, protected-species surveys, BNG metric, LEMP/CEMP, lighting strategy), identify the national law/policy/guidance it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection (or advise that no sustainable objection exists). England-focused. Not legal advice.
flood-representation-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Evaluate the flood-risk and drainage evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Flood Risk Assessment, Drainage Strategy / SuDS report, and the Sequential/Exception Test justification), identify the national policy and guidance it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection — or advise that no sustainable objection exists. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
heritage-representation-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Evaluate the heritage/historic-environment evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Heritage Statement / Statement of Significance, setting and archaeological assessments), identify the statutory duties and national policy it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection — or advise that no sustainable objection exists. Covers listed buildings, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, non-designated assets and archaeology. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
national-planning-policy-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. The shared national-policy layer for the England planning skills: verify the current NPPF/PPG edition before citing anything, and supply the decision-making core — s.38(6) and the development plan's primacy, the paragraph-11 presumption ("tilted balance") and its footnotes, emerging-plan weight, and the tests for planning conditions and obligations. Used by the triage and representation skills; also answers direct "what does the NPPF say / is this paragraph current" questions. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
planning-balance-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. The final "so-what" test for a planning representation: given the assembled, evidenced grounds against a UK planning application, anticipate the decision-maker's planning balance — identify the governing statutory/policy tests (s.38(6), the tilted balance, heritage great weight, Green Belt very special circumstances, the transport and flood tests), weigh harms against the scheme's benefits honestly, and recommend what the representation should actually ask for: refusal, deferral for information, or conditions — or advise that the balance favours approval. Run after application-triage and the representation skills. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
policy-compliance-assessment-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Assess a UK planning application against the policies that govern it, starting with the formally **adopted** development plan published by the local planning authority — which has primacy. Identify and verify that plan first (adoption dates, superseded policies, the policies map), then score the proposal policy by policy from -2 (significant conflict) to +2 (strongly aligned), assess NPPF/PPG and any emerging plan separately at lower weight, and conclude on accordance with the plan read as a whole. Use for "does this comply with the local plan", "which policies does this application breach", "assess this against adopted policy", "policy analysis". England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
policy-representation-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Draft a policy-led representation on a UK planning application — in **support** or in **objection**, as the user chooses — from a policy compliance assessment. Each point is anchored to a quoted adopted development-plan policy and to the application's own documents, the other side is acknowledged, and the ask is clear (grant, grant subject to conditions, refuse, or do not determine yet). Will not manufacture policy compliance or conflict to fit a stance, and flags any mismatch between the stance and the evidence. Use for "write a letter of support", "draft an objection based on the policies", "write my representation". England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review, and a representation is normally published in the submitter's name.
transport-representation-nppf-2024-12
ARCHIVED - December 2024 NPPF edition (superseded 17 August 2026). Use only when the user explicitly asks to work under the pre-August-2026 framework and has confirmed they want the archived skills; outputs must state they cite a superseded framework. Evaluate the transport/highways evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Transport Assessment/Statement, Travel Plan, parking schedules, street-layout drawings, and mitigation secured at outline), identify the national and local transport policy/guidance it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection (or advise that no sustainable objection exists). England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
national-planning-policy
The shared national-policy layer for the England planning skills: verify the current NPPF/PPG edition before citing anything, and supply the decision-making core — s.38(6) and the development plan's primacy, the presumption in favour of sustainable development (policies S3–S6 of the August 2026 coded NPPF, replacing the old paragraph-11 "tilted balance"), emerging-plan weight, and the tests for planning conditions and obligations. Includes a December 2024 → August 2026 citation crosswalk. Used by the triage and representation skills; also answers direct "what does the NPPF say / is this policy current" questions. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
application-triage
Given a UK planning application, work out which material planning considerations are actually engaged and which representation skill(s) to run (ecology, transport, heritage, flood risk, …), in what priority order — or advise that there is no strong ground to object. The router for the planning representation skills. Handles amendment applications (s.73 variations, s.96A non-material amendments) by first rebuilding the original permission and every prior amendment. England-focused. Not legal advice; human review required.
ecological-representation
Evaluate the ecological evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Ecological Impact Assessment, protected-species surveys, BNG metric, LEMP/CEMP, lighting strategy), identify the national law/policy/guidance it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection (or advise that no sustainable objection exists). England-focused. Not legal advice.
flood-representation
Evaluate the flood-risk and drainage evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Flood Risk Assessment, Drainage Strategy / SuDS report, and the Sequential/Exception Test justification), identify the national policy and guidance it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection — or advise that no sustainable objection exists. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
heritage-representation
Evaluate the heritage/historic-environment evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Heritage Statement / Statement of Significance, setting and archaeological assessments), identify the statutory duties and national policy it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection — or advise that no sustainable objection exists. Covers listed buildings, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, non-designated assets and archaeology. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
planning-balance
The final "so-what" test for a planning representation: given the assembled, evidenced grounds against a UK planning application, anticipate the decision-maker's planning balance — identify the governing statutory/policy tests (s.38(6), the location-based presumption of the August 2026 NPPF (S3–S6), heritage substantial weight, Green Belt very special circumstances, the transport and flood tests), weigh harms against the scheme's benefits honestly, and recommend what the representation should actually ask for: refusal, deferral for information, or conditions — or advise that the balance favours approval. Run after application-triage and the representation skills. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
transport-representation
Evaluate the transport/highways evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Transport Assessment/Statement, Travel Plan, parking schedules, street-layout drawings, and mitigation secured at outline), identify the national and local transport policy/guidance it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded objection (or advise that no sustainable objection exists). England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
policy-compliance-assessment
Assess a UK planning application against the policies that govern it, starting with the formally **adopted** development plan published by the local planning authority — which has primacy. Identify and verify that plan first (adoption dates, superseded policies, the policies map), then score the proposal policy by policy from -2 (significant conflict) to +2 (strongly aligned), assess NPPF/PPG and any emerging plan separately at lower weight, and conclude on accordance with the plan read as a whole. Use for "does this comply with the local plan", "which policies does this application breach", "assess this against adopted policy", "policy analysis". England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
policy-representation
Draft a policy-led representation on a UK planning application — in **support** or in **objection**, as the user chooses — from a policy compliance assessment. Each point is anchored to a quoted adopted development-plan policy and to the application's own documents, the other side is acknowledged, and the ask is clear (grant, grant subject to conditions, refuse, or do not determine yet). Will not manufacture policy compliance or conflict to fit a stance, and flags any mismatch between the stance and the evidence. Use for "write a letter of support", "draft an objection based on the policies", "write my representation". England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review, and a representation is normally published in the submitter's name.
planning-document-search
Retrieve the documents attached to a UK planning application from the local council's public online planning portal, given the application reference and the council name. Covers the major portal vendors (Idox, Northgate, Civica, Ocella, Agile, NEC, TerraQuest, StatMap, DEF Atrium and more) with a per-vendor retrieval recipe and a council→portal→vendor registry.
noise-representation
Evaluate the noise evidence submitted with a UK planning application (Noise Impact Assessment, acoustic report, BS 4142 assessment, plant and servicing details, management plans), identify the national and local policy and standards it engages, and draft a concise, well-founded representation — or advise that no sustainable objection exists. Covers both directions: new noise-generating development affecting existing receptors, and new noise-sensitive development exposed to existing noise (the agent-of-change principle). England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
committee-pack-review
Scrutinise a planning application that is going to, or has gone to, planning committee. Use this whenever someone asks to analyse, review, scrutinise, challenge or understand a committee report, an officer's report, a committee agenda or pack, or an application going before members — however they phrase it, and without their having to name this skill. Also use it when someone gives only an application reference and council and the application turns out to be at committee stage. Finds the committee meeting and its documents on the council's committee system (not the planning portal), identifies the item, triages whether it repays scrutiny, tests the officer report and the load-bearing claims it rests on, catches the late addenda that change a recommendation, recovers the representations that carry planning weight and anchors each to a named policy, and ends with independent cases for approval and for refusal. Deliberately does not strike a balance. Works to the meeting deadline. England-focused. Not legal advi
planning-report-critique
Find and rank the defects in a planning assessment someone else wrote — an officer report, appeal statement or planning statement — for a reader deciding whether to act on them. Runs planning-report-quality, then reports only what is wrong and matters, ordered by severity, with a verbatim quote for each. Separates findings from observations, and treats a true-but-immaterial point as an observation rather than a fault. England-focused. Not legal advice; human review required.
planning-report-quality
Measure the quality of a written planning assessment — an officer report, delegated report, appeal statement or agent's planning statement — claim by claim. Every checkable assertion is tested on four separate axes: is it accurate, is it a material planning consideration, what weight is put on it, and does the recommendation depend on it. Produces a line-by-line table and explainable rates, never a single quality score. England-focused. Not legal advice; human review required.
committee-speech
Write the speech you will actually stand up and deliver at a UK planning committee, against an application. Use this whenever someone is speaking, or might speak, at a planning committee and needs the words — "write my three-minute committee speech", "we have two objector slots, split the points", "I'm speaking against this application on Thursday", "what do I say to the councillors", "help me with my deputation", "how do I object in person". Takes the grounds already assembled by the other skills in this repo and turns them into timed, speakable objector speeches that move a committee toward refusal, deferral, or approval on tighter conditions — selecting the few points that can change a vote, framing each as the decision members are actually taking, and sequencing them across the speakers without overlap. Objector-side by design, and says so. Will not manufacture grounds that are not there. England-focused. Not legal advice; no warranty; output requires human review.
Bio shown is the top-scored skill's repo description as a fallback — real GitHub bios land in a future update.