The Secret Key that could Unlock your Challenging Planning Application for Self Build in England
Cambridge based Self Build Architect, Oliver Murray explains how planning decisions are made and shares a secret key that could help you unlock planning permission for your self build.
In this blog post, we will discuss the challenge of obtaining planning permission for your self build, and how it is possible to claim your Right to Build, even on challenging sites in the countryside, in the green belt, and in conservation areas.
Before proceeding, we would like to kindly ask you to subscribe to our mailing list so that you can receive copies of our blog posts and other self build resources directly to your email inbox.
Why do I need to obtain planning permission for my self build?
The Town and Country Planning Act, 1947 effectively nationalised the right to build by requiring all developments, less a few exceptions, to apply for planning permission. This Act is the foundation of our planning system and the root of the UK housing crisis, a topic that I will not discuss in this post but which I have covered at length in an article published on Medium titled A Diagnosis of the UK Housing Crisis.
Why is obtaining planning permission sometimes such a challenge?
For many aspiring self builders, obtaining planning permission can be a huge roadblock standing between them and the pursuit of their self build dreams. Obtaining planning permission can be particularly difficult if your plot is in the countryside (i.e. anywhere outside of defined settlement boundaries) or in designated areas such as the Green Belt or a Conservation Area. In such cases, the secret key we will share in this article could be crucial in helping you obtain planning permission, or if your planning application has already been refused, it could help you overturn that decision through the planning appeal process.
So why is it so hard to get planning permission in certain areas? National planning policy states that there is a “presumption in favour of sustainable development” (NPPF, paragraph 10). This means that generally when a planning application is submitted, the onus is on the local planning authority to either approve the application or to demonstrate why permission should be refused. In the countryside or designated areas however, the presumption is reversed, and the onus is on the applicant (and any consultants supporting them) to demonstrate why permission should be granted. This is where the difficulty lies – finding a reason as to why an exception should be made for your application and convincingly communicating this to the decision makers.
How are decisions regarding planning permission made?
National planning policy sets out specific guidance on how proposals in the countryside or effecting designated areas such as the Green Belt should be considered and exceptions that apply, however there is a general approach to making decisions regarding planning applications or appeals and this approach can also be used when preparing Planning Statements to support applications.
- The first step is to identify the ‘material considerations’, i.e. matters that should be taken into account, and these typically fall into one of two categories: the harms (including conflicts with the development plan) and the benefits.
- The second step is to attribute a ‘weight’ to both the harms and the benefits to indicate the significance of each, typically using wording such as “limited”, “moderate”, or “substantial”.
- The third and final step is to perform a sort of balancing exercise to determine whether the harms or the benefits are greater.
The analogy of a set of antique balancing scales is useful. The harms with their weightings are placed on one side, with the benefits with their weightings on the other side. For a planning permission to be granted, it needs to be demonstrated that the benefits outweigh the harms.
Understanding the hierarchy of weights in the planning balance
The National Planning Policy Framework (Dec 2024) applies weighting to various material considerations using terms such as “great weight, significant weight, and substantial weight” it does not define these terms or indicate how they should be measured against each other. For example, it is not immediately obvious whether “significant weight” or “substantial weight” carries more weight than the other.
Thankfully, some clarity has come through appeal system. For example, in paragraph 78 of appeal decision Land at Barnet Land and paragraph 119 of appeal decision Land Lying To The East Of Hartfield Avenue, appeal inspectors provided the same “scale of weights” described below:
In ascending order: no weight/neutral; very limited; limited; moderate; significant; very significant; substantial; and very substantial.
Using the above as a guide, we created the below Bar Graph showing a Hierarchy of weights in the planning balance. Using this hierarchy of weights in planning statements and other communications relating to planning applications and planning appeals can provide clarity, help avoid misunderstandings, and help establish common ground regarding the application of weightings.
The topic of weighting in the planning balance is a topic that others in the industry have commented on such by Planning barrister Zack Simons of #planoraks in his article The basics #20 – weighing things up and Simon Ricketts of Simonicity in his article The Weighting Game.
A secret key that could tip the balance on the planning weighing scale
Now we come to the main subject and purpose of this article – to share a newly discovered ‘secret key’ that could tip the balance on the planning weighing scale in favour of your self build planning application. There is a new ‘material consideration’ that has been attributed either ‘substantial weight’ or "significant weight" in a growing number of appeal deicisions involving self build and custom housebuilding. If you include this material consideration in your Planning Statement or Appeal Statement of Case, it could help outweigh any perceived harms and make the difference between your self-build being granted planning permission or not.
The Right to Build – legislation
This new ‘material consideration’ is an incidental advantage that has come about as a side-effect of the Right to Build legislation that came into force on 31st October 2016. For those who are unaware, the “Right to Build” is a nickname used to refer to the Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 (as amended by the Housing and Planning Act 2016) which was introduced with the intention of creating a legal right to build one’s own home. These pieces of legislation placed a two-fold duty on all local authorities in England to:
- keep a Self Build Register of people who would like to acquire a serviced plot of land in their area to build their own home; and
- to give sufficient development permissions to meet the demand registered within three years of the end of each base period (i.e. the 30th October after the demand is registered).
Right to Build Legislative Timeline
When the Right to Build was introduced, it was hailed as a game-changer for the self build and custom (CSB) housebuilding industry, one that was expected to double the size of the industry in a decade (by 2020), by removing the most significant roadblock standing between people and their pursuit of their self build dreams – i.e. finding a plot (and getting planning permission to build a home on that plot).
The Right to Build – progress report
After 10 years, the success of the Right to Build legislation has been limited. While the Right to Build has stimulated new activity in the industry with the rise of Custom Build sites (as discussed here), statistics published by the Government show that while 64,851 individuals have joined self build registers by 30th October 2024, this demand has not adequately been met. The data available shows that about two-thirds of all local authorities are consistently failing to meet their duty with respect to granting enough permissions to meet demand, thereby denying people their right to build.
Right to Build Data Analysis 2016-2022
You can find if your local authority is meeting its duty by checking the LIVEDIN Local Authority Map that shows which local authorities are and are not meeting their duty under the Right to Build legislation.
While the picture presented by the data is not great, the National Custom and Self Build Association (NaCSBA), who were instrumental in bringing about the Right to Build legislation, have pointed out in their Custom and Self Build Market Report 2022 that while the collection of data has improved over time, it remains incomplete and subject to both misreporting and non-reporting by local authorities. Hence the situation is likely worse than the data available suggests.
In the government commissioned Bacon Review, Richard Bacon MP concluded that “The steps taken have not yet had the desired effect to create a ‘self-build revolution’ or delivered on the aspiration to double the size of the CSB sector by 2021”.
Right to build appeals decisions
With this backdrop of unmet demand for self build and custom housebuilding however, something interesting has happened. It all started on 30th October 2019, a day that was dubbed “England’s first ever Right to Build Day” by the NaCSBA, because this was the first day when local authorities in England were required to demonstrate that they had granted enough development permissions to meet the demand on their Registers, as recorded three years prior to that day on 30th October 2016. While the general thought behind the Right to Build was that local authorities would make plots available to self builders, in areas where local authorities had failed to meet demand and bring forward plots itself, after it became apparently that many local authorities had failed to meet demand, self builders and custom build developers started bringing forward their own plots and asking why these developments should not be permitted on account of the Right to Build. A number of planning applications submitted on this basis were initially rejected by local planning authorities but were subsequently approved by the planning inspectorate through the planning appeal process.
Right to build appeals map
We are now aware of over 20 successful appeal decisions where contribution to unmet demand for self build was the main reason for granting planning permission, and we have plotted these on our Right to Build Appeals Map. Planning consultant, Andy Moger, of Tetlow King Planning says that on their appeals database, they have logged over 50 successful appeals involving proposals of self build and custom housebuilding, and they have themselves given evidience for many of these appeals.
Right to Build Appeals Map – by protaHOMES
This does not mean that all planning appeals submitted on this basis will be successful, but the body of evidence now available from these planning appeals has established that the planning inspectorate considers contribution to meeting unmet demand for self build and custom housebuilding as a material consideration and as a public benefit that is typically attributed “substantial weight” in the planning balance sufficient to outweigh perceived harms, including harms to the countryside, to the Green Belt, and to Heritage Assets.
Download our Right to Build Appeal Decisions List
You can download our Right to Build Appeal Decisions list as an Excel Spreadsheet which includes: the date of appeal decision, the location, the number of plots, a descriptions of the harms and the weighting attributed to those harms, a description of the benefits and the weight given to those benefits, and a link to the appeal decision on the planning inspectorate’s search portal.
Right to Build Case Studies
The following case studies have been provided to illustrate and highlight the weight of harms that have been outweighed by meeting unmet demand for CSB housing.
Case Study 1 – Self Build Plots in the Green Belt
In March 2023, appeal decision Pond View granted planning permission for four self build plots in the Green Belt. As already discussed in section 2, The Framework advises that the construction of new buildings is regarded as inappropriate in the Green Belt, with a few specific exceptions, and that “inappropriate development should not be approved except in very special circumstances”. Paragraph 153 explains that “very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.” The proposals were not considered to fall into any of the allowable exceptions and were therefore considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Furthermore, it was judged that the proposal would lead to a significant loss of openness to the Green Belt, and the harm to the Green Belt was attributed substantial weight. The only way that the proposals could be approved was if very special circumstances existed. Unmet demand for custom and self build housing existed with a shortfall of some 318 units. The appeal inspector described this as “a very substantial and acknowledged shortfall”, and judged that the proposal for four custom and self build plots “merit very significant favourable weight in the planning balance”, that “clearly outweigh the totality of the harm identified to the Green Belt”, concluding that “very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposals exist”. Given the importance attributed to protection of the Green Belt with The Framework and the high bar generally required to demonstrate very special circumstances, this decision highlights the substantial weight that must now be attributed the provision of custom and self build housing in the face of unmet demand for this type of housing.
Case Study 2 – Custom and Self Build Homes in a Conservation Area and near a Listed Building
In April 2021, appeal decision The Causeway granted planning permission for the provision of 7 custom and self build plots for detached dwellings. Loss of open space as a result of the proposals was judged to cause harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and to the significance of listed buildings, and the inspector judged this harm to be “at the lower end of less than substantial harm”, while still giving it great weight and importance. Unmet demand for custom and self build housing existed, but the exact shortfall was disputed. The appeal inspector judged that “the proposed provision (of 7 CSB plots) would be of a substantial benefit” and commented that “If I were to take unmet demand into account, the scale of the proposal would not change the substantial weight that I have set out above, nevertheless, the position would only confirm my opinion about the weight that I have given to the provision of this type of housing.” In the assessment of planning balance, the appeal inspector said that “the provision of self-build and custom-build houses would be a public benefit as they would help the Council meet its duty, help address the established demand for this type of house and widen the type and size of housing in the area. These are substantial social benefits”. The inspector also described some economic benefits which were judged to carry moderate weight, before concluding that “collectively, in this case, I consider these public benefits would outweigh the less than substantial harm that I have identified.”
Case Study 3 – A single Self Build Dwelling in the open countryside
In May 2024, appeal decision Land adjacent to 110 Ribchester Road allowed an appeal and granted outline planning permission for a single self-build dwelling. The application site had been identified as outside the settlement boundary, and therefore as part of the open countryside, and the proposed development was therefore in conflict with the local development plan. The Council however had not met its statutory duty with respect to meeting demand arising from its Self-Build Register, and the inspector judged that “although the appeal scheme is only for 1 dwelling, I consider that substantial weight should be given to the fact that it is a self-build dwelling that would contribute towards meeting the significant demand for such housing in the borough”, and the appeal was allowed on this basis. Some local authorities may dismiss the public benefits of a single self-build dwelling as being limited, but this appeal decision makes it clear that irrespective of the scale of the proposal, the benefit of contribution to unmet demand for CSB housing still carried substantial weight. This is consistent with the Causeway decision which stated explicitly that “the scale of the proposal would not change the substantial weight”.
The Secret Key
So the secret key is this – that if your local authority is failing to meet demand for self build and custom housebuilding in your area, then the very fact that you are applying for a self build and therefore contributing to meeting that unmet demand, is a material consideration and generally considered to be a benefit of substantial weight, and that this that should weigh in favour of your planning application or appeal and could unlock your self build dreams.
Steps you can take today towards claiming your Right to Build
If you want to claim your right to build your own home, here are some steps that you can take today:
- Register with the Self Build Portal and your local Self Build Register – to register your interesting in building your own home. If you haven’t already signed up to your local Self Build Register, why not do so today. Rather than searching for your local authority’s register directly, it is recommended that you use the Self Build Portal as after you register and log in to the website, you can enter your postcode, and the portal displays some useful information such as the number of people already on the register and the number of plots permissioned to date. Doing this will give you a good idea how engaged your local authority is with respect to your right to build. The portal will also provide a link direct to your local authority’s self build registration page.
- Check out the LIVEDIN Local Authority Map – that shows which local authorities are and are not meeting their duty under the Right to Build legislation.
- Download our Right to Build Appeal Decisions List as an Excel Spreadsheet with link to the original Appeal Decisions.
- Book a Getting Started Consultation – a free online video call to discuss your self build aspirations and any questions you may have about the process.
About the author
Oliver Murray is a Self Build Architect and the founder of protaHOMES, an architectural practice based in Cambridge that specialises in the design of High Performance Self Build Homes for self builders in Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, Norfolk, Bedfordshire, and Essex, and sometimes further afield. protaHOMES was founded with the mission of making the process of building your own homes easier and more accessible. To that end, we have created a number of free resources for aspiring self builders including: a Brief Worksheet, a Self Build Starter Pack, and a Passivhaus Infosheet. We also provide Self Build Coaching alongside our architectural services to help our clients progress through their self build journeys with clarity and confidence.