Maplify is introducing AI Planning Co-Pilot, a dedicated conversational assistant for land intelligence and planning research across the UK. It brings policy questions, early site feasibility, mapped land constraints and the next steps in due diligence into a single workspace. The intention is straightforward: help people ask better questions about land, connect the evidence available to them and understand what still needs checking.
Property developers, landowners, architects, planning consultants, investors and conveyancers often face the same challenge at the start of a project. The answer to a simple question — could this site be developed? — may depend on a combination of planning legislation, national policy, the relevant Local Plan, designated land, access, flood risk, ecological interests, historic applications and legal title. These are separate strands of evidence, not interchangeable answers.
Our new AI planning assistant is designed to make the early investigation more coherent. Users can now open a full-page chat, choose a specialist research mode, ask follow-up questions and use the Maplify map to bring selected site context into the discussion.
What is Maplify AI Planning Co-Pilot?
AI Planning Co-Pilot is an interactive UK land and planning research workspace available at Maplify Co-Pilot. Rather than relying on a fixed set of multiple-choice answers, users ask natural-language questions, refine a brief and continue the same conversation. The assistant is instructed to provide evidence-aware explanations and to distinguish verified facts, supplied details, professional inference and questions requiring further checks.
The workspace has a simplified chat-first layout. A research-mode dropdown focuses the next response, and a + button inside the message composer lets users attach a site from Mapview or enter their own site notes. A help icon opens a dedicated Co-Pilot user guide. Users can copy responses, export transcripts or choose to save a conversation in their browser.
Eight ways to research planning and development land
Co-Pilot includes eight specialist workflows. Each keeps the same conversation history but directs the assistant to organise the analysis around the subject selected:
- General planning research: understand terminology, statutory requirements, planning processes and practical land questions.
- Site feasibility: explore development principles, opportunities, infrastructure dependencies, access questions and evidence gaps.
- Planning policy: distinguish legislation, national planning policy, adopted development plans and emerging local policies.
- Planning constraints: organise possible restrictions into an evidence-status register and identify which sources need checking.
- Applications and precedent: plan a review of earlier applications, officer reports, appeal decisions and comparable schemes.
- Ownership and legal due diligence: identify title, covenant, rights of way, easement and access issues for formal verification.
- Environmental research: investigate potential flood, ecology, heritage, ground stability, contaminated land and tree-protection concerns.
- Decision briefs: summarise the available facts, outstanding risks, recommended investigations and next actions.
These workflows are intended to improve the quality and structure of preliminary analysis. They do not replace the evidence needed for a planning application, land acquisition or legally binding property assessment.
How the AI assistant works with Maplify's interactive map
A central part of the launch is the link between a conversational question and a mapped site. Maplify brings together planning, property and environmental mapping in one interactive land intelligence map. A map can provide the geographic starting point, but it still takes interpretation and follow-up investigation to understand what a particular layer means for a proposed development.
Co-Pilot can receive a summary of available evidence from a site that a user has selected in Mapview. That context is not treated as a certified search, complete GIS investigation or proof that a designation is absent. It is information the assistant can use to ask more targeted questions and recommend what to verify next.
- Open AI Co-Pilot and use the + button in the message composer.
- Choose to import a site from Mapview. If no site context is already available, open the map and select the relevant location.
- From the selected site's Mapview intelligence panel, choose the dedicated Co-Pilot action to pass the available site summary back into the chat.
- Ask a site-specific question such as: Which issues in this evidence require professional verification before a planning application?
- Ask for a risk register, an evidence-gap list or a consultant briefing rather than treating the first answer as a definitive conclusion.
The existing Mapview site-selection workflow remains in place. Co-Pilot extends it with a conversational research layer — it does not silently create new land ownership records or undertake field surveys.
Planning law and legal questions: clarity about the limits
Planning law in the UK is not one uniform system. England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have different legislation, authorities, policy frameworks and procedures. The Co-Pilot is instructed to establish the relevant jurisdiction rather than automatically applying England-specific guidance everywhere.
It can explain legal concepts and flag statutory or policy questions to investigate, but it cannot guarantee that its interpretation is current and correct for a particular case. It cannot grant permission, establish title ownership conclusively, decide a legal boundary, issue a binding planning opinion or replace a solicitor or planning consultant. A council's adopted plan, a decision notice, title documents and specialist reports may all be necessary before acting.
Within the chat, the assistant also follows a specific linking rule: it links only to pages on Maplify. When a user asks for an external website link, it will explain that it cannot provide one. It can still identify the official document, register or organisation whose evidence should be obtained and checked.
What can a developer or land buyer ask?
Below are practical example questions suitable for an initial conversation:
- “What should I investigate before buying a former agricultural site for housing?”
- “Explain the difference between Green Belt designation and development plan allocation.”
- “Create a due-diligence checklist for access, utilities, flood risk, ecology and legal title.”
- “What might make a nearby planning permission relevant or irrelevant to my proposal?”
- “Using the imported Mapview summary, separate what we know from what still needs verifying.”
- “Prepare an initial planning consultant instruction brief and list the documents to obtain.”
These examples work best when users provide a location, intended land use and any relevant site evidence. If the important facts are not known, the assistant should make that uncertainty explicit and suggest the next practical investigation.
The purpose of Co-Pilot is to make early research easier to organise and act on — not to replace statutory decisions or qualified review. The right outcome of a preliminary question is often a clear list of verifiable facts and actions, rather than an overconfident “yes” or “no”.
What changes for teams using Maplify?
For property professionals, the practical opportunity is continuity. A user can move from the planning constraints map to a specific question, then to a structured site appraisal or list of next checks without rebuilding the research context from scratch. For an investor, that might mean prioritising red flags before committing to searches. For an architect, it might mean identifying relevant planning-policy questions before concept design. For a planning consultant, it might mean assembling an initial client briefing with gaps clearly flagged.
Maplify continues to provide dedicated tools for site reporting, planning application investigation, land title context and planning and environmental data layers. Co-Pilot is an additional way to connect the questions that those tools raise.
How to start using the new Co-Pilot
Open the AI Planning and Land Intelligence overview to explore capabilities and examples, or go straight to the live Co-Pilot chat. You can begin with a general question and import a mapped site when a geographic assessment is needed. The Help Centre's Co-Pilot guide explains the + button, map handoff, chat controls and important evidence limitations.
Guest visitors can try two questions; further use requires a Maplify account. The tool is intended as an accessible research starting point that encourages a more careful understanding of the records, people and procedures involved in land decisions.
Frequently asked questions
Does Co-Pilot guarantee planning permission?
No. It helps structure research about a proposal and its constraints, but only the relevant planning authority can determine an application through the applicable statutory process.
Can I discuss any UK planning jurisdiction?
Yes, the assistant can discuss England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It should recognise that their law, terminology, procedures and policies differ; always confirm the jurisdiction for site-specific guidance.
Can the AI access my mapped site?
Yes, through the existing Mapview handoff when a site is selected and its available evidence is passed to the Co-Pilot. That does not guarantee complete data coverage.
Will Co-Pilot link to other websites?
No. Chat links are restricted to Maplify pages. The assistant can describe which primary-source document or authority you may need to consult, without providing outbound links.
Can I save my research?
Yes. You can save a conversation locally in the same browser, retrieve it later, copy the transcript or export it as Markdown. Avoid saving confidential site notes on a shared device.
Published by the Maplify Team, 28 October 2026. Product features described as available at publication; mapping and legal information is subject to source coverage and verification. For further detail, see data sources and accuracy and limitations.