Permitted development vs full planning permission: what's the difference?
Almost every homeowner starting a home improvement project runs into these two terms, and almost every homeowner assumes one is simply "easier" than the other without fully understanding why.
Permitted development, in plain terms
Permitted development (PD) is a set of national rights that let certain home improvements go ahead without submitting a formal planning application, provided the project stays within defined limits on size, height and position. It exists to save both homeowners and councils from processing straightforward, low-impact changes through the full planning system.
If your project qualifies:
- No planning application fee to the council for the works themselves
- No 8-week statutory wait for a planning decision
- Design freedom is more limited: you're working within fixed size and height rules, not what you'd ideally want
- You can still apply for a Lawful Development Certificate (currently £274, half the fee for a full householder application) as optional formal confirmation that your project qualifies. This isn't required by law, but it matters for mortgage lenders and future buyers' solicitors
Full planning permission, in plain terms
Full planning permission is the formal process required when a project falls outside permitted development limits, whether because of size, a restriction specific to your property, or the nature of the work itself. It means submitting a complete application to your local council, who assess the proposal against local planning policy and can approve, refuse or request changes.
If your project needs this route:
- The council fee is approximately £548 for a standard householder application in England (from April 2026), plus a Planning Portal service charge of roughly £90 if you submit online
- The statutory decision period is 8 weeks from validation, not from the date you submit. Validation itself (checking you've supplied the correct plans, scales and fee) can take anywhere from a few days to several weeks
- More design freedom: you're not constrained by permitted development's fixed depth and height limits, so more ambitious schemes become possible
- Neighbour consultation and potential objections are part of the process, and a contested application can add months if it goes to committee
Why "which is easier" is the wrong question
The instinct is to assume permitted development is always the better route because it's faster and cheaper. Sometimes that's true. But the more useful question is which route actually gets you the result you want:
- If your ambition fits comfortably within PD limits, there's rarely a reason to choose full planning instead. You'd be adding cost and time for no design benefit.
- If your property sits in a conservation area, has an Article 4 Direction removing PD rights, or is a flat rather than a house, permitted development may not be available to you at all, however modest your project is.
- If your ambition genuinely exceeds PD limits (a larger rear extension, a full mansard, a two-storey addition), full planning isn't a fallback. It's simply the route that matches what you're trying to build.
The mistake we see most often is homeowners designing towards permitted development limits by default, without checking whether their specific property actually has those rights, only to find out at submission stage that a conservation area designation or an Article 4 Direction means they needed full planning all along. That's a costly point to discover a problem, because it usually means redesigning under a different set of rules after time and fees have already been spent.