Understanding Fallback Positions in Planning: Strategy or Last Resort?
- David Maddox
- 7 days ago
- 2 min read
Obtaining planning permission is rarely straightforward. A well-prepared proposal can still face resistance, whether due to policy tension, design concerns, or local politics. This is where a fallback position can become a valuable part of your planning strategy.
A fallback position refers to a form of development or use that could be lawfully implemented if the preferred scheme is refused. It’s typically something that benefits from permitted development rights, in other words, a Plan B with legal backing. For example, if a council is minded to refuse your application for a new-build residential scheme on an employment site, you may still be able to convert the existing commercial floorspace into residential use under Class MA of the GPDO. That permitted development route forms a credible fallback. If you're willing and able to carry it out, it becomes a material consideration that planning officers and inspectors must take into account.
The courts have been clear: a fallback doesn’t have to be your ideal option, and it doesn’t need to be more likely than your main proposal: it simply needs to be realistic. The key case here is Mansell v Tonbridge & Malling BC, where the Court of Appeal confirmed that even the possibility of fallback development is enough, provided there’s a genuine likelihood that it would be pursued if necessary. That bar is relatively low, but not theoretical. You need to show that the fallback is legally permitted and that there’s a plausible prospect of it being implemented.
For developers, permitted development rights often provide the most compelling fallback options. Whether it's converting offices to flats under Class MA, agricultural buildings under Class Q, or extending a dwelling to its full PD limits, these routes can anchor your case. If your fallback would result in a poorer design, less sustainable development, or avoid key contributions such as affordable housing, it can create a strong incentive for planning authorities to approve your more considered application instead.
That said, a fallback position doesn’t always need to be a lower quality scheme. In some cases, it may still lead to site optimisation or represent an efficient use of land. While it may not offer the same benefits as your preferred proposal, it can still align with broader planning objectives and serve as a viable route to delivery.
The most effective fallback strategies are underpinned by clear evidence: plans, legal opinions, even prior approvals or lawful development certificates. These demonstrate seriousness and protect against arguments that the fallback isn’t viable or lawful. When presented properly, a fallback can be the difference between a refusal and a permission – not because it makes your scheme policy compliant, but because it changes the decision-making balance.
Ultimately, the fallback position is not a silver bullet. But when used thoughtfully, it’s a highly effective planning lever and not a last resort, but a strategic move that shows you’ve considered the alternatives, and that permission for your preferred scheme is not only reasonable, but arguably the best outcome for all.
