A substantial Potters Bar town-centre redevelopment has gone directly to the Planning Inspectorate under section 62A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The application, S62A/2026/0159, proposes 293 homes and 1,742 square metres of flexible commercial floorspace at Maple House, High Street and Princes Parade.
Hertsmere has now set out its formal officer position. The council is not objecting to the principle or the amount of development, but officers say the scheme is of insufficient design quality for such a prominent regeneration site and want the Inspector to independently test the applicant’s viability case before accepting a proposal with no affordable housing.
Need help with a planning application?
Planning Geek isn’t just a reference site - preparing and submitting planning applications is what we do. If you’d like a hand with an application, an appeal or any other planning matter, we’d be glad to help.
What is proposed at Maple House and Princes Parade?
The applicant is Chase (Canada) Ltd. The Planning Inspectorate records the site as Maple House, Nos 8–16 (even) and 30–32 High Street and Nos 1–7 Princes Parade, Potters Bar, EN6 5BA.
The official description is for the partial demolition of the existing buildings, while retaining the existing two-storey car park and substation, followed by redevelopment for a mixed-use scheme of residential apartments in Class C3 and flexible Class E commercial floorspace across four blocks. Internal roads, parking, drainage, landscaping, amenity space and associated works are also included.
The application documents give the more useful figures:
- 293 homes, comprising 14 studios, 83 one-bedroom, 150 two-bedroom and 46 three-bedroom homes
- 1,742 sq m of flexible Class E floorspace
- four principal blocks, identified as Blocks A, B, D and E
- building heights ranging from four to 15 storeys in the applicant’s planning statement
- Block A rising to about 49 metres to parapet level
- High Street frontage generally around five to six storeys
- 125 car parking spaces, mainly using the retained two-storey car park
- cycle parking, servicing and a new internal road arrangement
The site is about 1.63 hectares. Existing development includes Maple House, commercial units and flats, a car wash and extensive surface parking. Canada Life Place and its basement access ramp sit outside the application red line and are not part of this proposal.
The planning constraints have not disappeared because it is section 62A
The site is within Potters Bar town centre and the council’s secondary shopping frontage. It is not in a conservation area and there are no listed buildings within the application site, but the settings of nearby heritage assets remain relevant.
The local planning authority questionnaire also identifies protected trees. The site is in Flood Zone 1, although surface-water matters still need to be addressed. Hertsmere’s policy documents, affordable-housing requirements, biodiversity policies and town-centre evidence remain part of the planning context.
That is an important point. A section 62A application does not switch off the development plan. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 continues to require determination in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Why can the developer apply directly to the Planning Inspectorate?
Section 62A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows eligible applications in a designated authority to be made directly to the Secretary of State. In practice, the Planning Inspectorate handles the application on the Secretary of State’s behalf.
Hertsmere Borough Council was designated for quality of decision-making on major applications with effect from 9am on 15 June 2026. The Government’s designation notice says the designation remains in force until revoked.
The designation does not require every major applicant in Hertsmere to use this route. Current Planning Inspectorate guidance is explicit: an eligible applicant has a choice between applying to the local planning authority in the normal way and applying directly to the Secretary of State through the Inspectorate.
Planning Geek has a fuller guide to section 62A planning applications, including the categories of application that can use the procedure.
What counts as a major application for section 62A?
For a district planning authority, the major-development thresholds include residential schemes of 10 or more homes, or a residential site of at least 0.5 hectares where the number of homes is not known. Non-residential development can also qualify through the 1,000 sq m floorspace or one-hectare site thresholds.
Not every application type is eligible. The section 62A procedure has exclusions, including householder applications and some other categories. This Potters Bar proposal is comfortably within the major-development threshold on both its residential scale and its site area.
For background on application routes more generally, see our guide to types of planning application and the Planning Applications Index.
Who will actually decide S62A/2026/0159?
The Planning Inspectorate case page states that this application will be determined by an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State. It is therefore not a Hertsmere Planning Committee decision.
The application was validated on 6 August 2026. Representations must be made by 11 September 2026, and the Inspectorate currently gives a target decision date of 5 November 2026. The procedure is still recorded as to be confirmed.
The full application and current document list can be viewed on the official Planning Inspectorate case page.
Hertsmere has now set out its formal position
Hertsmere’s role is unusual. The council can assess the scheme, comment on it, challenge evidence and tell the Inspector what it thinks the planning balance should be. It cannot grant or refuse permission.
A special Planning Committee is being held at 6pm on 3 September 2026 to consider the council’s response. The Hertsmere committee agenda confirms that the authority is being treated as a statutory consultee and that members’ considerations will form part of its formal response to the Inspectorate.
Officers recommend no objection in principle to the quantum of development. But that is not an unqualified endorsement. They say the scheme is of insufficient design quality for its prominent location and its importance to the wider regeneration of Potters Bar.
Officers say the design has gone backwards
The officer assessment is particularly critical of the gap between the pre-application work and the scheme eventually submitted to the Inspectorate. Hertsmere had previously involved its heritage and townscape advisers and a Design Review Panel.
Officers say elements of that work have survived, but that the overall design quality has been diminished and is poorer than expected for a landmark site at a critical junction in Potters Bar.
One example is the loss of a central public space and play area shown during pre-application discussions. The basement access ramp serving Canada Life Place now occupies that part of the wider landholding, leaving the civic space on the High Street as the principal public open-space element within the section 62A scheme.
No affordable housing — and a £14.1 million viability deficit
The affordable-housing issue is likely to attract just as much attention. Hertsmere’s policy CS4 seeks a minimum of 35% affordable housing on a scheme of this scale. The application proposes 0%.
The applicant relies on a viability assessment by Turner Morum. The figures reported to members show the scheme producing a deficit of about £14.10 million even as 100% market housing. Scenarios including 12% affordable housing produce larger deficits in the applicant’s appraisal.
Hertsmere has not independently verified those figures. Officers say that, because the council is acting as a consultee rather than the determining authority, it is not in its normal position to commission its own viability review. They therefore want the Inspector to arrange independent scrutiny.
The council’s position is that affordable housing should be sought if permission is granted unless the Inspector is satisfied that the scheme is genuinely unable to support any affordable provision, either on site or through a payment in lieu.
That is perhaps the clearest illustration of how section 62A changes the practical relationship between an applicant and a council: Hertsmere can challenge a £14.1 million viability case, but it cannot decide what weight that case ultimately carries.
Why this section 62A planning application matters commercially
Section 62A changes the route to a decision in several practical ways:
- a developer can bypass ordinary LPA determination for an eligible application while the designation remains in force
- the local authority becomes a participant and statutory consultee rather than the decision-maker
- the council can raise design, affordable-housing and viability concerns but cannot determine them
- the application is managed on the Inspectorate’s timetable and procedural requirements
- local members do not vote on the application itself, although their views can form part of the council’s representation
- the development plan, local evidence and site-specific policy constraints still apply
This does not mean the section 62A route is automatically quicker or more favourable to applicants. It is a different route, with a different decision-maker, and it places a premium on submitting a complete case from the outset.
The Maple House application now demonstrates that difference particularly clearly. Hertsmere is taking a formal position on design, viability and affordable housing, but the final judgment on all three sits with the Inspector.
Why was Hertsmere designated?
The Government notice says Hertsmere is designated for the quality of decision-making on major applications. Hertsmere’s own statement explains that the measure related to the proportion of major refusals subsequently overturned on appeal during the 2023–2025 assessment period.
The council says six out of 40 relevant appeal decisions produced the performance figure used for designation, while also pointing out that its speed of decision-making on major applications was 94%. Whatever view is taken of the performance measure, the legal consequence is straightforward: while the designation remains in force, eligible applicants have the section 62A choice.
What happens after the Inspector’s decision?
A section 62A decision does not generate the ordinary applicant appeal route under section 78 in the way an LPA refusal normally would. The statutory route for challenging the validity of the decision is a High Court challenge under section 288 of the 1990 Act, subject to the strict statutory time limit.
That is a fundamentally different risk profile from making the same application to the council and retaining an ordinary planning appeal if permission is refused. Our page on planning challenges and judicial review explains why court proceedings are not a rehearing of the planning merits.
Key dates for the Potters Bar application
- 3 September 2026 — Hertsmere special Planning Committee considers its formal consultee response
- 11 September 2026 — deadline for representations to the Planning Inspectorate
- 5 November 2026 — current target decision date
- procedure — still to be confirmed by the Planning Inspectorate
The Maple House application is worth watching because it takes a provision many practitioners only encounter in guidance and applies it to a substantial town-centre redevelopment with real design, viability, affordable-housing and regeneration questions.
Official sources
- Planning Inspectorate: S62A/2026/0159 case page and application documents
- Hertsmere: special Planning Committee agenda, 3 September 2026
- MHCLG: Hertsmere Borough Council notice of designation
- Planning Inspectorate: section 62A planning applications guidance
- Hertsmere Borough Council: statement on section 62A designation
- Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, section 38
Created: 28th August 2026 · Updated: 1st September 2026 — section 62A planning application
