Planning law states that applications should be determined in accordance with the policies in an area’s Local Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In the planning profession, this is often referred to as the ‘flat balance’.

So, what is the ‘tilted balance’?

Whilst the tilted balance is a policy approach in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), there is no specific reference to the term within it. Rather, it is shorthand for the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained within Paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF. 

This states that where there are no relevant policies, or if the most relevant Local Plan policies for determining a planning application are ‘out of date’ planning permission should be approved. The exceptions are where a proposal is in a protected area (as defined by the NPPF) or where the harms caused by the proposed development significantly outweigh its benefits.

The term is used to define this passage of policy because, when engaged, the tilted balance should change the ‘balancing exercise’ which the decision-maker (planning officer, inspector or secretary of state) uses when deciding whether or not to grant planning permission. The balance is whether the harms ‘significantly and demonstrably’ outweigh the benefits of granting permission. The tilted balance ‘tilts’ the balance in favour of approving an application.

When the tilted balance is engaged, it is necessary to conduct a planning balance in determining applications and appeals. This is where the decision-making will afford varying degrees of weight to the harms and benefits associated with a proposed development. It is a nuanced and subjective process, and not as clear-cut as one benefit outweighs one harm. 

What is meant by a ‘protected area’?

Footnote 7 of the NPPF defines protected areas as habitat sites, Sites of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI), Green Belt, Local Green Space, National Landscapes (formerly Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty), National Parks, Heritage Coast, irreplaceable habitats, designated heritage assets, and areas at risk of flooding or coastal change.

However, there is no one definitive source to find out what a protected area is. It could be that policies mean a proposed development may affect the setting of a protected area, whilst not necessarily being specifically covered spatially by one of these areas with a policy restriction. 

What is meant by the term 'out of date'?

The term is defined in Footnote 8 of the NPPF. The Local Plan is considered out of date (for housing applications) where there is a lack of five-year supply (or four-year supply for authorities which are progressing a new Local Plan in accordance with Paragraph 226 of the NPPF) or where the Housing Delivery Test indicates that the delivery of housing was below 75% of the requirements for the past three years. 

However, there are other ways that a Local Plan or specific policy may be considered to be out of date, such as if it no longer performs its intended role, or if certain material considerations mean that the policy can no longer be relied upon or given weight. These matters will need to be considered through individual planning applications, and the level of weight given to them is a matter for the decision-maker.

Does the tilted balance guarantee planning permission?

The tilted balance does not guarantee consent nor does it replace the legal responsibility of the decision-maker to first consider whether planning permission should be granted in accordance with the Development Plan, when read as a whole, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. A key material consideration is the NPPF, and whether the tilted balance would be engaged under Paragraph 11(d). 

Whilst the tilted balance may be engaged, the decision-maker can, with appropriate reasoning, refuse planning permission if the harms associated with a proposed development outweigh the benefits.

Further information

Contact Harry Ramsey

Savills Planning