Agricultural prior notification refused: the options left
Class A prior approval covers siting, design and external appearance only. What a refusal actually means, and why most are fixed by moving the building rather than arguing.
An agricultural prior notification refused on siting, design or external appearance is a refusal of prior approval, not a refusal of planning permission, and the difference decides what you do next. The permitted development right in Class A of Part 6 of Schedule 2 to the General Permitted Development Order 2015 still exists. What the council has done is withhold approval of the details it is entitled to consider, which leaves four routes open: amend and resubmit, appeal, apply for full planning permission, or reconsider whether the building needs to be where you put it.
Most refusals are recoverable, and most are recovered by moving the building rather than by arguing about it.
What the authority can and cannot consider
Class A permits development reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture on an agricultural unit of five hectares or more, within limits on ground area, height, proximity to roads and, for livestock buildings and slurry structures, distance from a protected building.
For significant development the Order requires you to apply to the authority for a determination as to whether its prior approval will be required for the siting, design and external appearance of the building. Those three matters are the whole of the authority's remit on a Class A building. Not landscape policy in general, not neighbour amenity in general, not the merits of the enterprise.
One threshold question sits behind that remit. The right only applies where the development is reasonably necessary for agriculture on the unit, and where an authority concludes it is not, it can take the view that the right is unavailable at all. That is a different ground from a siting refusal and it needs a different answer.
The authority has 28 days from receipt of a valid application to notify you whether prior approval is required. Miss that deadline and the development may proceed, which is why the date stamp on the submission matters.
Common reasons siting and appearance are refused
Refusals cluster around a handful of patterns.
A building placed away from the existing farmstead, on open ground or against a ridgeline, where the officer considers it could sit within or adjoining the existing group. This is the most common single reason and the easiest to fix.
Ridge height and roof pitch out of keeping with the neighbouring buildings, particularly where a standard portal frame is proposed next to a traditional range.
External finishes that are too light or too reflective. Councils in open landscapes routinely expect dark recessive colours for cladding and roofing, and a specification left as "profiled sheet, colour to be agreed" invites a refusal rather than a condition.
Access arrangements where a new private way crosses open ground, since the siting and means of construction of a private way is also within the prior approval remit.
And, less often, a conclusion that the scale of the building exceeds what the holding reasonably needs.
Amending and resubmitting
There is no limit on how many times you can apply, and a second application costs a further fee. Where the refusal is about siting or finish, this is almost always the quickest route.
Before resubmitting, do three things. Read the officer's report rather than the decision notice, because the report says what would have been acceptable. Speak to the case officer and put the proposed change in front of them informally. And change enough to answer the reason, rather than the minimum you can bear.
A resubmission that moves a building 40 metres to sit behind an existing barn, drops the ridge by a metre and specifies a dark recessive colour will usually succeed where an argument about the original siting would not.
Watch the aggregation rule while you are moving things. Class A restricts the ground area of buildings erected within 90 metres of the proposed building over the preceding two years, so relocating a structure closer to recent development can take the whole thing outside the right.
Appeal prospects and timescales
An appeal against refusal of prior approval goes to the Planning Inspectorate and is normally dealt with by written representations. Check the time limit stated on your decision notice, since appeal periods differ by application type and are stated on the notice itself.
Appeals are worth considering where the authority has strayed outside its remit, for example by refusing on grounds of agricultural justification when the necessity of the building is not seriously in doubt, or by applying local plan landscape policy as though it were a full application. Inspectors are alert to that.
They are less attractive where the disagreement is about whether a building should sit 60 metres from the farmstead or adjoining it. That is a planning judgement, an inspector may well agree with the officer, and you will have spent three months to find out.
Timescale is the real argument against appealing a fixable refusal. A written representations appeal generally takes longer than an amended resubmission, and for a building needed before harvest that decides the question.
Full application as an alternative
Where the objection goes to necessity or to the wider landscape effect, a full planning application is sometimes the better route, because it lets you argue the whole case rather than three matters.
It costs more and takes eight weeks rather than 28 days, and it exposes the proposal to considerations that Class A would have kept out. The advantage is that a permission granted on a full application settles the point, and a building that has been through it cannot later be challenged on the basis that the right never applied.
A full application is also the answer where the building falls outside the Class A limits, exceeding 1,000 square metres of ground area, over the height limits, too close to a classified road, or inside the 400 metre protected building distance for livestock housing and slurry structures.
Evidence of agricultural need
Where necessity is in issue, evidence has to do the work.
Set out the holding, its area and its enterprises. Explain what the building will hold and why the existing buildings cannot, with the capacity figures behind that. Where the need follows a change in the business, such as additional stock, a new crop or a regulatory requirement on storage, say so and date it.
A Planning Statement is the right home for this on a full application. Where landscape effect is the substantive objection, and particularly in a National Landscape or National Park, a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment prepared to the recognised professional methodology carries far more weight than assertion. Councils expect a suitably qualified author for that work and professional review is strongly advised.
Avoiding the refusal next time
Three habits remove most of the risk.
- Site new buildings within or adjoining the existing complex unless there is an operational reason not to, and state the reason if there is.
- Specify colours and materials in the application rather than leaving them open, using dark recessive finishes in open countryside.
- Submit a proper site plan showing the existing buildings, the levels, the access route and the relationship to any dwelling, rather than a marked-up extract.
A short pre-application conversation is usually free or low cost for agricultural proposals, and 20 minutes with the case officer before submission prevents most of what goes wrong. Where a diversification use is planned in the same building later, our note on farm diversification into workshops and offices explains why the agricultural route should be kept clean, and for larger livestock proposals the screening question covered in our note on poultry unit scale and screening arrives alongside it.
Illustrative example: a 24 metre by 18 metre general purpose store refused on siting, proposed in a field corner 120 metres from the yard because that was where the ground was level. The resubmission places it against the existing grain store, accepts a cut and fill to manage the level difference, drops the ridge from 8 metres to 7, and specifies dark green cladding. Approved within 28 days.
This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.
Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which reports an agricultural building proposal is likely to need.
Frequently asked questions
What can a council consider on a Part 6 prior approval application?
For a Class A agricultural building, only the siting, design and external appearance, and for a private way the siting and means of construction. Behind that sits a threshold question of whether the development is reasonably necessary for agriculture on the unit, because the right only applies if it is. Wider landscape and amenity policy is outside the remit.
How long does the council have to respond?
Twenty-eight days from receipt of a valid application to notify you whether prior approval is required. If that deadline passes without notification, the development may proceed in accordance with the details submitted. That makes the date stamp on the submission worth recording carefully, along with proof of the fee payment.
Can I resubmit after a prior approval refusal?
Yes, as many times as you like, with a fee each time. Read the officer's report rather than the decision notice, because the report indicates what would have been acceptable. Change enough to answer the reason rather than the minimum, and check the ninety metre aggregation rule if you are relocating the building.
Is it worth appealing a refusal of prior approval?
It is worth it where the authority has gone outside its remit, for example by refusing on agricultural justification when the need is not seriously disputed, or by applying general landscape policy as though it were a full application. It is less attractive where the dispute is a siting judgement, because an appeal takes longer than a resubmission.
When do I need a full planning application instead?
When the building falls outside the Class A limits on ground area, height, distance from a classified road or the 400 metre distance from a protected building for livestock housing and slurry structures. Also where the authority disputes agricultural necessity, since a full application lets you argue the whole case rather than three matters.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.