Appeal success – Permission in Principle secured for 3 dwellings in Uttlesford

Permission in Principle (PIP) is a fairly new route to securing permission for housing led developments. It was first introduced via the Housing and Planning Act 2016, with the application route being established in June 2018. Its intention was to streamline housing applications ensuring much more timely delivery of housing – focusing on a two stage approach to securing planning permission.

The first stage is the PIP, which focuses on the three issues of location, land use and amount – thus establishing the ‘principle’ of the development. This is arguably the key hurdle to overcome in planning, particularly for sites located beyond settlement boundaries for which development is generally resisted. The first stage is comparable to a watered down outline planning application – without the need for costly third party reports and a determination period of just 5 weeks. Once the principle has been established, the Technical Details Consent follows which contains the full details of the development, similar to a full planning application.

Permission in Principle – appeal success for up to 3 dwellings

Plainview recently secured success at appeal for a PIP for 1 -3 dwellings in Uttlesford. The PIP route was recommended given the time and cost savings it presented and as there was an in principle issue of location (beyond settlement boundaries) which needed to be overcome.

After exploring the planning history of the site it was clear there had been previous issues in securing a residential consent, however we were able to identify the outdated policy context and housing land supply situation to present an argument in favour of the proposal. Despite this and the clear evidence presented in the application of the presumption in favour in the planning balance, the Council refused the application on the basis of rural amenity harm due to the development of a greenfield site outside the settlement boundary.

We felt that the Council had incorrectly assessed the planning balance – which required significant and demonstrable harm to be identified to justify the refusal. For a PIP application with no layout plan or set units it was considered premature of the Council to refuse the application on the grounds of rural amenity harm. They had also failed to consider the extensive benefits of developing the site; provision of housing in a sustainable location, close to main settlements and within meters of a public bus stop.

A Written Representations appeal was subsequently submitted to challenge the Council’s conclusions and especially given that the current spatial strategy was under-delivering on housing, it had become an accepted position that some breach of settlement boundaries needed to occur. Plainview were able to put a compelling case together to highlight:

• the scope of a PIP application;
• the outdated and restrictive nature of planning policies;
• the sustainability of the site despite its location beyond settlement boundaries;
• its assimilation with the wider residential context; and
• how a refusal on the basis of perceived rural amenity impacts cannot be substantiated as there is no scheme in which to assess this against.

The Inspector drew the same conclusions as Plainview and the appeal was allowed.Plainview have now been instructed to continue with the preparation of the Technical Matters application as the second stage to securing consent.

How we can help you with your development goals

If you have a small site or would like to develop a housing-led scheme and you do not want to incur excessive expense before knowing if your site is suitable for housing-led development, then contact our team via enquiries@plainview.co.uk to see how we can best assist.  Alternatively, call us via 01242 501003 to receive a no obligation fee quote for our services.