Budgeting a permission in principle application

Permission in principle costs two fees rather than one, and that is the first thing to understand before choosing the route. The permission in principle establishes that the location, the land use and the amount of development are acceptable. Everything else, which is to say the design, the access, the drainage, the ecology and the materials, is dealt with afterwards in a separate technical details consent application with its own fee and its own determination period.

For the right site, usually a small infill plot where the only real question is whether a house belongs there at all, the route is quick and gives a landowner something to market. For the wrong site it is two sets of consultation, two sets of objections and a bill larger than a single outline application would have been.

What permission in principle establishes

The route comes from sections 58A and 59A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, inserted by the Housing and Planning Act 2016, and it is deliberately narrow.

A permission in principle settles three matters and no others: the location of the development, the land use, and the amount of development expressed as a number of dwellings, usually as a minimum and a maximum. It cannot be granted subject to conditions, which removes the ability to agree a holding position on a matter that is nearly resolved.

Technical details consent then deals with everything else, and it has to be consistent with what the permission in principle established. Propose a different quantum or a different use at the second stage and you are outside the permission, which means a fresh application.

A permission in principle granted on application runs for a default period, commonly three years, unless the authority specifies longer. An entry on a brownfield land register, which is the other way a site can acquire permission in principle, runs on its own timescale. Check the current Order for both, because the figures have been amended.

Which sites the route is open to

The application route is restricted to minor housing-led development. In broad terms that means fewer than ten dwellings on a site below the major development threshold, with any non-residential element limited, and it excludes development requiring environmental impact assessment or appropriate assessment under the habitats regulations.

So the route is closed to most of the schemes that would benefit from staged consent. A site of twelve units cannot use it. Neither can a site where screening indicates likely significant effects, and the cost of establishing that is the subject of environmental impact assessment screening and scoping request costs in its own right.

Check the exclusions before paying anything. An invalid permission in principle application wastes the fee and several weeks, and the authority is not obliged to tell you in advance that the route is unavailable.

The fee basis and what it buys

The fee for a permission in principle application is calculated by reference to the site area, charged for each 0.1 hectare or part of it, rather than per dwelling. The technical details consent fee is then charged on the basis that applies to the development itself.

Both figures sit in the national fee regulations, which were uplifted in December 2023 and are indexed annually on 1 April, so take the current schedule rather than a number from a file note. The practical consequence of the area basis is that a large plot with one house on it pays more at the first stage than a tight plot with four, which is the opposite of how most people assume planning fees work.

The honest summary is that the first stage buys certainty on principle and nothing else. It does not reduce the work at the second stage, and it does not reduce the evidence the authority will eventually require.

Documents at the first stage

The statutory requirement is light: the application form, a site location plan identifying the land, a statement of the amount of development, and the fee. No design and access statement, no technical reports, no elevations.

Light does not mean nothing, though, and this is where applicants misjudge the route. The authority has to publicise the application and consult, and it can refuse the principle where a constraint cannot be resolved. A plot in flood zone 3 with no sequential test, or a site with no demonstrable access, invites refusal on principle even though the Order required no evidence about either.

So the judgement is tactical. Where a constraint is visible on a map and will be raised, submit a short note dealing with it voluntarily, even a paragraph with a plan extract. Where the site is unconstrained, submit the minimum and hold the budget back for stage two. A brief planning statement addressing the development plan position costs little and heads off the objection that the principle is contrary to policy.

Technical details consent and its fee

Technical details consent is a full application in everything but name. Expect to provide the drawings, the levels, the access arrangements, the drainage, the ecology and biodiversity information, the arboricultural material and whatever else the authority's local validation list requires.

Two features distinguish it. The determination period is shorter than for a comparable full application, which is the route's main practical benefit. And the authority cannot revisit the principle: location, use and amount are settled, so the argument is confined to detail.

Watch the sequencing. Site investigation and seasonal survey work still has to be done, and budgeting ground investigation on a brownfield plot is a cost that falls at the second stage however little the first stage cost. Levy liability arises on the technical details consent as the operative permission, so claim any self-build exemption against that application and before commencement.

Where the two-stage route costs more

Five situations where the arithmetic goes the wrong way.

1. A large plot with a small number of dwellings, where the area based fee at stage one exceeds what an outline application would have cost.
2. A site where the principle was never in doubt, so the first stage bought nothing a pre-application enquiry would not have confirmed.
3. A contested site, where two rounds of publicity produce two rounds of objection and two decisions capable of appeal.
4. A site needing a Grampian condition or an obligation to make the principle acceptable, which permission in principle cannot deliver because it cannot carry conditions.
5. A scheme whose quantum is likely to change, since a revised number of dwellings needs a new permission in principle rather than a variation.

That last point deserves emphasis. The flexibility developers are used to, varying a permission under section 73, does not apply here in the same way, so the amount of development stated at stage one needs to be right, with a range wide enough to cope with design evolution.

Comparing it with outline permission

Outline permission remains the better tool for most sites with any complexity.

An outline application can cover major development, can be granted subject to conditions, allows reserved matters to be approved in phases, and can be varied. It costs more at the outset and takes longer, and it requires more information up front, including a design and access statement and the technical material the authority insists on.

Permission in principle wins on three things: speed to a decision on principle, a low information burden at stage one, and a clean answer a landowner can show a buyer or a lender. For an owner selling a single plot, that is often exactly what is wanted.

An illustrative example. An owner of a garden plot inside a settlement boundary, with no designations and an existing vehicular access, applies for permission in principle for one to two dwellings on a 0.08 hectare site. The fee is one band of the area based charge, the submission is a form, a red line plan and a one page policy note, and the decision confirms the principle. The plot is then marketed with the permission, and the buyer commissions the design and brings the technical details consent application themselves.

That is the route working as intended. Use it for that, and use outline permission for anything where the detail and the principle cannot sensibly be separated.

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.