Planning Performance Agreement or an extension of time
An extension of time postpones the decision date and your right to appeal non-determination. A performance agreement buys sequencing and named officer time. Here is when each is worth it.
A Planning Performance Agreement and an extension of time both push the decision date back. They are not alternatives to each other in any meaningful sense. An extension of time is a short written agreement that the authority may determine the application later than the statutory period, and it costs nothing. A Planning Performance Agreement is a project management arrangement, paid for, that sets out who does what and when across the whole application, usually from pre-application onwards.
On a major scheme the honest answer is often both: a performance agreement to structure the work, with an extension of time agreed within it to cover the statutory position.
What a performance agreement buys
A Planning Performance Agreement is a bespoke arrangement between the applicant and the local planning authority setting out an agreed programme for handling an application. Authorities charge for it, using their power to charge for discretionary services, and the fee usually reflects named officer time and specialist input.
What you are buying is capacity and sequencing. A typical agreement names the case officer and the lead on each discipline, fixes the pre-application meeting dates, sets the submission date, schedules consultee engagement, sets target dates for the officer report and for committee, and records what the applicant will provide by when.
The obligations run both ways, and that is the point. An applicant who submits a transport assessment three weeks late has broken the agreement just as surely as an authority that misses the report date.
What it does not buy is a favourable decision, and a well-drafted agreement says so explicitly. Authorities are careful about this because the arrangement must not look like a payment for an outcome.
How an extension of time works
The procedure order allows the applicant and the authority to agree in writing a period longer than the statutory determination period. That is the whole mechanism. An email exchange recording the agreed date satisfies it.
The statutory periods are eight weeks for most minor applications, thirteen weeks for major development and sixteen weeks for development subject to environmental impact assessment. An extension replaces the end date with the agreed one.
Authorities ask for extensions routinely, often late in the period and often more than once. There is no obligation to agree, and there is no penalty for refusing beyond the practical one: an authority facing a refusal to extend may issue a decision on the material before it, which is rarely the decision you wanted.
| Planning Performance Agreement | Extension of time | |
|---|---|---|
| Form | Signed agreement with a programme | Written agreement on a date |
| Cost | Charged by the authority | None |
| Scope | Pre-application through to decision | The determination period only |
| Commitments | Both parties, across milestones | Timing only |
| Effect on appeal rights | None directly | Postpones the non-determination right |
Effect on appeal rights
This is the part that matters commercially. A right of appeal against non-determination arises once the statutory period, or any agreed extended period, has expired without a decision.
Agree an extension and you postpone that right to the new date. Agree a series of extensions and you can find that eighteen months have passed without any appealable event. Some applicants use that deliberately, preferring a negotiated permission to an appeal. Others find they have signed away their negotiating position one fortnight at a time.
The discipline is to treat each extension as a decision rather than an administrative formality. Ask what specifically will be resolved in the extended period, and agree a date that reflects that rather than a round number of weeks.
Fee refund provisions also interact with agreed extensions, so check the current fee regulations before assuming that a long-running application will attract a refund.
Programme certainty and milestones
A performance agreement is worth its fee when the application is complex enough that sequencing is the risk. Multiple statutory consultees, a committee cycle that meets monthly, a section 106 that needs the authority's legal team, and an authority whose specialist officers are shared across departments: that combination produces delay that no extension of time will fix.
Build the agreement around the dates that cannot move. Committee dates are published a year ahead. Consultee response periods are fixed. Work backwards from the committee you are aiming at, and put the agreement's milestones at the points where slippage would cost you a cycle.
Include the legal agreement in the programme. Obligations drafting is the most common cause of a scheme missing the committee it was reported to, and it is the item most often left out of the performance agreement entirely.
Name the consultees too. A lead local flood authority, a county highway authority and a statutory undertaker each work to their own timetable, and an agreement that schedules the applicant and the case officer but says nothing about when consultee packages go out has programmed only half the process. Where a consultee has a published pre-application service, use it and record the reference in the agreement.
Who signs and what is committed
On the authority's side, the signatory is normally a head of development management or equivalent, and the agreement should name the case officer and the specialist leads. On the applicant's side it is the applicant or the agent with authority to commit the project team.
Read what the authority has committed to. Some agreements commit only to meetings and to using reasonable endeavours on dates, which is thin for the money. Better ones commit to specific outputs: written feedback within a stated period, a draft heads of terms by a given date, a named officer's attendance.
Also read the termination and refund provisions. Schemes change, and an agreement with no exit is an expense you cannot stop.
Deciding on a major application
- If the application is straightforward and the only issue is the authority's workload, an extension of time is sufficient and free.
- If the risk is sequencing across consultees, legal drafting and a committee cycle, a performance agreement earns its fee.
- If the authority is under-resourced in a specific discipline, ask whether the agreement funds that specialism specifically, since that is where the money does most good.
- If you may want to appeal non-determination, do not sign open-ended extensions, and set each new date against a stated deliverable.
- If the scheme is likely to change during determination, think about whether a section 73 or section 96A route will be needed afterwards, and build it into the programme.
For smaller schemes neither instrument is usually worth much, and the faster route is a well-prepared application with the supporting documents the validation list names. A Planning Statement that engages with the policies the officer will cite saves more time than any agreement, and the full list of report types shows what a major submission typically carries. Where the answer is an appeal after all, householder appeal or the fast-track commercial route covers how the procedures differ.
This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.
Frequently asked questions
Does an extension of time cost anything?
No. It is a written agreement between the applicant and the authority that the application may be determined after the statutory period, and an email exchange recording the agreed date satisfies the procedure order. A Planning Performance Agreement, by contrast, is charged for under the authority's power to charge for discretionary services.
What happens to my appeal rights if I agree an extension?
The right to appeal against non-determination arises once the statutory period or any agreed extended period expires without a decision. Agreeing an extension postpones that right to the new date. A series of extensions can leave a scheme with no appealable event for a long time, so treat each one as a decision.
Can I refuse to agree an extension?
Yes. There is no obligation. The practical risk is that the authority determines the application on the material before it, which usually means a refusal. Where you refuse, say what would change your position and by when, so the refusal reads as a negotiating position rather than an impasse.
Is a Planning Performance Agreement worth the fee?
On a scheme where the risk is sequencing across several consultees, legal drafting and a monthly committee cycle, usually yes. On a straightforward application where the only issue is workload, an extension of time does the same job for nothing. Read what the authority has actually committed to before signing.
Does a performance agreement make approval more likely?
No, and any well-drafted agreement says so. Authorities are careful that the arrangement cannot look like payment for an outcome. What it buys is named officer time, agreed milestones and earlier identification of problems, which tends to improve the application rather than the decision-maker's view of it.
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.