Applications on a site that straddles two council boundaries

A site that crosses a local planning authority boundary needs two applications, one to each authority, because an authority can only grant permission for development in its own area. There is no single-decision route for an ordinary application under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and a permission from one council authorises nothing on the other side of the line.

That produces a scheme with two decisions, two fees, two validation lists, two development plans and, if you do not manage it, two different sets of conditions. The work is in making the two determinations arrive at the same answer at roughly the same time.

Why two applications are usually needed

An application is made to the authority for the area in which the land is situated. Where land sits in two areas, each authority has jurisdiction over its part and none over the other, so the standard practice is parallel applications describing the same development, each seeking permission for the works within that authority's area.

In a two-tier area the position can simplify. For county matters such as minerals and waste, the county council is the authority, so a site crossing two district boundaries within one county produces one application rather than two. Inside a National Park the Park authority holds the function for its side of the line.

Some neighbouring authorities have arrangements to discharge planning functions through a joint committee under the Local Government Act 1972. Where that exists it is worth knowing about at pre-application stage, because it changes the committee route even if it does not remove the need for two applications.

Dividing the description of development

The two descriptions have to describe the same scheme without either authority appearing to grant something outside its area.

The approach that causes least trouble is to describe the whole development in both applications, with a clear statement of which elements fall within that authority's area, and to show the full site on the location plan with the authority boundary and the relevant portion outlined. Officers then assess the whole scheme as a planning unit while granting only what they can.

Say it explicitly in the planning statement: that a parallel application has been submitted to the named adjoining authority, with its reference number once known, that the development is indivisible, and that the applicant seeks consistent determination. Cross-reference the reference numbers in both submissions as soon as both are validated.

Ownership certificates need care as well, since the land interests and any agricultural holdings differ across the boundary and each application needs its own correct certificate, as set out in ownership certificates A to D.

Fees payable to each authority

Do not guess this one. The national fees regulations contain a specific provision for development on land straddling a boundary, and the calculation is not simply the full fee twice.

Write to both authorities before submitting, set out the floorspace or unit numbers falling in each area and the total, state the figure you intend to pay each of them, and ask for written confirmation. An underpaid fee leaves the application invalid and the clock does not start, which on a cross-boundary scheme means the two determinations fall out of step before they have begun. Exemptions and reductions follow the national categories, covered in planning fee exemptions and reductions.

Co-ordinating consultation and committee dates

The determination periods run separately, and so do the publicity arrangements, so left alone the two applications will drift apart.

Six things are worth agreeing in writing at pre-application stage.

1. A single set of submission documents prepared to the union of both validation lists.
2. A target validation date so the eight or 13 week periods start together.
3. Aligned consultation start dates, since the 21 day period is the same but the start is not.
4. One set of consultee approaches, with a single technical submission to the highway authority, lead local flood authority and water undertaker where those bodies cover both areas, and two where they do not.
5. Joint officer meetings, with both case officers present.
6. Target committee dates in the same cycle, or confirmation that both will be determined under delegated powers.

A Planning Performance Agreement covering both authorities, or two agreements with matching milestones, is the mechanism that makes this real rather than aspirational. It costs money. And on a cross-boundary scheme it is almost always worth paying.

Chasing consultees is harder when two case files exist, and the approach set out in getting consultee responses and the officer's case file needs doing twice, with the responses cross-copied so neither officer is working from half the picture.

Inconsistent decisions and managing the risk

The realistic failure modes are these.

Mismatched conditions are the quiet problem. A construction management plan condition requiring one access route in one authority's decision and a different one in the other cannot both be discharged. Ask both authorities to work to an agreed draft condition schedule before determination, and provide it yourself rather than waiting to see what arrives.

Where one authority refuses, you have the usual appeal rights against that decision. The Planning Inspectorate can link appeals and deal with related cases together, and a linked appeal on a cross-boundary scheme is worth requesting explicitly. Where one authority simply does not determine, the trade-offs in appealing non-determination or waiting are sharper than usual, because appealing one half while the other half sits with a willing officer rarely helps.

Section 106 agreements with two authorities

Planning obligations are given to the authority for the area in which the land is situated, so a single deed with both authorities as parties, and obligations drafted to run to the relevant authority for the land in its area, is the clean structure. Two separate deeds work but create two sets of monitoring, two sets of triggers and two opportunities for drafting to diverge.

Contributions need allocating. Education, open space and affordable housing demand generated by a cross-boundary scheme does not divide neatly along the boundary, and each authority will reasonably want the contribution its own services require. Expect that conversation to be the slowest part of the process, and expect to need a variation later as the scheme evolves, which is where the mechanics in varying a section 106 agreement after permission become relevant.

Levy liability across the boundary

Each authority is the charging authority for its own area, with its own charging schedule and its own rates. Liability is calculated on the chargeable floorspace in each area, so two liability notices arrive and the rates may differ substantially for identical buildings a few metres apart.

Illustrative example, not a real scheme: a 120 dwelling development with 78 units in authority A and 42 in authority B, with the primary access and the attenuation basin in A and the public open space in B. Two applications, each describing all 120 units and identifying the split. Two fees, calculated under the straddling provision and confirmed in writing. One environmental statement serving both. One deed with both councils as parties. Two levy liability notices at different rates. One set of conditions, agreed in draft before either committee.

Claim any exemptions and submit the assumption of liability in both areas, and remember that the self-build and residential extension exemptions, where they apply, are claimed separately to each charging authority. Missing one is a common and expensive error.

But the single most useful thing you can do is the least technical. Get both case officers in the same room, early, and keep them there.

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.