Prior Information Request — PIP

This guide describes the Portuguese urban-planning regime in force on 21 August 2026.

The procedural amendments introduced by Decree-Law 108/2026 are scheduled to enter into force on 1 October 2026 following the postponement enacted by Decree-Law 155-B/2026.

The reform is expected to change aspects of the instruction, processing and legal treatment of prior-information requests, including a clearer distinction between simpler and more developed applications.

Every PIP submitted, amended or still at an early procedural stage on or after 1 October 2026 should be reassessed under:

• the amended RJUE
• the applicable transitional provisions
• any new regulations or forms
• and the implementation requirements adopted by the relevant municipality.

See Decree-Law 108/2026, Decree-Law 155-B/2026 and the Government summary of the RJUE reform.

At the end of this guide, you should be able to determine:

• whether a PIP is necessary or commercially useful
• whether to submit a general or detailed PIP
• which development parameters must be expressly tested
• how much design work should be completed before submission
• which external authorities may need to be consulted
• whether the applicant must control or own the property
• how the PIP should be coordinated with an acquisition agreement
• how to interpret a favourable, conditional or unfavourable decision
• how long the decision can be relied upon
• what must be done before its legal protection expires
• and which planning procedure should follow.

The objective is not merely to obtain a positive letter.

The objective is to obtain a decision that answers the project’s material questions clearly enough to support the next investment decision.

Should the project submit a PIP?

Answer five questions.

1. What is the current property position?

SELECT ONE

• Property already owned
• Acquisition under negotiation
• Acquisition contract signed conditionally
• Option or exclusivity agreement in place
• No legal control over the property

2. How clear is the planning position?

SELECT ONE

• Permitted use and development parameters are clear
• Use is clear but capacity is uncertain
• Several planning rules require interpretation
• The proposal may require an exception or discretionary assessment
• The applicable planning framework has not been confirmed

3. Which investment decision depends on the answer?

SELECT ALL THAT APPLY

• Land acquisition
• Acquisition-price adjustment
• Investor commitment
• Bank finance
• Appointment of the full design team
• Operator agreement
• Construction procurement
• Property valuation
• No immediate investment decision

4. Which parameters require confirmation?

SELECT ALL THAT APPLY

• Use
• Construction area
• Building footprint
• Height or number of floors
• Number of units
• Access
• Parking
• Infrastructure
• Land transfers
• Urban-development charges
• External-authority position
• Planning procedure

5. What is the current level of technical information?

SELECT ONE

• Property identity only
• Topographical survey and constraints plan
• Initial development concept
• Developed massing and area schedule
• Coordinated architectural proposal
• Complete architectural and engineering project

OUTPUT

Possible recommendation: No immediate PIP

The planning position may be sufficiently clear to proceed directly to the applicable urban-planning procedure.

Possible recommendation: General PIP

Use a general PIP to test overall feasibility, permitted use and the principal planning constraints before developing a complete proposal.

Possible recommendation: Detailed PIP

Use a detailed PIP where the acquisition, valuation or financing depends on defined parameters such as volume, implantation, height, uses, areas, infrastructure and land transfers.

Possible recommendation: Resolve the evidence first

Do not submit until the property boundary, title, existing lawful use, applicable plans or essential site constraints have been confirmed.

Possible recommendation: Obtain specialist authority input

Where the project depends on environmental, heritage, water, transport, aviation, coastal or other protected-sector requirements, align the PIP with an external-authority strategy.

CTA

Assess whether a PIP is appropriate

TOOL DISCLAIMER

This module provides preliminary organisational guidance only. It does not determine whether a PIP is legally required, predict the municipal decision or replace project-specific planning, architectural, engineering or legal advice.

A PIP is a formal request submitted to the competent municipal council for prior information concerning the feasibility and conditions of a proposed urban operation.

Under the current RJUE, any interested party may request prior information concerning:

• whether a defined urban operation is feasible
• the applicable legal and regulatory constraints
• infrastructure requirements
• administrative easements
• public-law restrictions
• development indices
• building height
• setbacks
• and other relevant development conditions.

The legal basis is found principally in Articles 14 to 17 of the current RJUE — Legal Framework for Urbanisation and Building.

A PIP can concern:

• construction
• reconstruction
• extension
• alteration
• demolition
• subdivision
• urbanisation works
• land remodelling
• change of use
• or a directly related group of urban operations.

The proposal must be sufficiently defined for the municipality to understand what is being asked.

A PIP is not:

• an informal planning opinion
• a general municipal enquiry
• a confirmation that the property is commercially viable
• a property-title report
• an environmental-impact assessment
• an approval of matters omitted from the submission
• a guarantee that no future costs will arise
• an unconditional construction right
• or, in ordinary circumstances, permission to commence works.

A favourable PIP should not be described as a building licence.

Its effect depends on:

• the exact request
• the information submitted
• the terms of the municipal decision
• the external opinions incorporated into that decision
• the applicable legal regime
• compliance with the validity period
• and whether the final project remains consistent with the approved assumptions.

Under the current RJUE, any interested party may submit a PIP.

The applicant does not necessarily need to be the registered owner.

This allows a potential purchaser, investor or developer to test a proposal before completing the acquisition.

However, where the applicant is not the property owner, the submission must include the prescribed identification of:

• the registered owner
• and other holders of relevant rights over the property.

The current regime requires this information to be supported through the applicable Land Registry documentation. The municipality then notifies the identified holders that the procedure has been initiated.

Commercial consequence

A potential buyer should not assume that a PIP can be submitted confidentially without the owner becoming aware of it.

Before submission, the parties should address:

• permission to access and survey the property
• notification of the owner
• responsibility for submission costs
• ownership of the designs and studies
• cooperation with municipal requests
• control over withdrawal or amendment
• use of the municipal decision
• and what happens if the acquisition does not complete.

Acquisition depends on development capacity

A PIP can test whether the property can support the use, area, height or number of units assumed in the acquisition appraisal.

The municipal plan requires interpretation

The site may be covered by planning provisions that are not sufficiently precise when applied to the specific property.

The proposal combines several operations

A project may involve demolition, reconstruction, extension, subdivision, infrastructure and a change of use.

A coordinated PIP can help the municipality assess the intended operation as a whole.

Infrastructure capacity is uncertain

The project may depend on:

• public-road access
• water supply
• wastewater drainage
• electricity
• telecommunications
• stormwater management
• or reinforcement of public infrastructure.

External authorities may be involved

The property may be affected by:

• heritage protection
• water resources
• coastal constraints
• protected habitats
• agricultural restrictions
• ecological restrictions
• road or railway protection
• airports
• civil-protection requirements
• or other administrative easements.

The investor or lender needs planning evidence

A defined municipal decision may support:

• valuation
• investment approval
• finance applications
• acquisition conditions
• joint-venture negotiations
• or project underwriting.

The project is intended to be phased

The PIP can help establish how the overall scheme, infrastructure and successive phases should be coordinated.

The development has several credible scenarios

The PIP may be used to test a preferred proposal and, where carefully structured, a defined fallback position.

Too many alternatives can, however, produce an unclear or limited response.

The property has not been correctly identified

Do not seek planning certainty against an unreliable boundary.

Complete the required:

• title review
• cadastral comparison
• topographical survey
• property-tax review
• and physical-boundary investigation.

The existing building’s lawful position is unresolved

A proposal based on an assumed existing area or use may fail if that baseline is incorrect.

Confirm:

• original approvals
• subsequent alterations
• authorised use
• registered areas
• municipal records
• and any unlawful works.

The site has a fundamental constraint

If development is clearly prevented by a decisive planning, environmental, access or infrastructure issue, resolve that issue before investing in a detailed PIP.

The applicable parameters are already sufficiently clear

Where the proposal fully complies with a precise plan and the complete project is ready, proceeding directly to the applicable control procedure may be more efficient.

The question belongs to another authority

A municipality cannot use a PIP to provide final determinations outside its legal competence.

The project requires environmental-impact assessment

Under the current RJUE, the consultations conducted as part of the PIP do not include the environmental-impact-assessment procedure.

The PIP and environmental strategy must be coordinated separately where the project falls within that regime.

The transaction deadline is unrealistic

A PIP should not be included as an acquisition condition without a long-stop date that allows for:

• preparation
• submission
• municipal processing
• external consultations
• clarifications
• decision
• interpretation
• and possible challenge or revision.

The current official framework distinguishes between a general prior-information request and a more specific or detailed request.

The Portuguese public-services portal refers to these as “informação prévia geral” and “informação prévia especial”. See the official urbanisation and building procedures portal.

General PIP

A general PIP under Article 14(1) is normally used to ask whether a proposed operation is feasible and which principal planning and legal conditions apply.

It may be appropriate where the project needs preliminary confirmation of:

• whether the intended use is acceptable
• the principal applicable planning rules
• approximate development capacity
• relevant public-law constraints
• the required urban-planning procedure
• or the need for additional studies and consultations.

A general PIP can require less design development, but a broad question may produce a broad answer.

Detailed PIP

A detailed PIP under Article 14(2) presents a more developed proposal and may ask the municipality to decide defined project parameters.

Under the current RJUE, it can specifically cover:

• volume
• alignment
• building height
• implantation of the building
• position of boundary walls
• architectural design
• design statement
• intended uses
• total construction area allocated to each use
• number of dwellings or other units
• ancillary, technical and service areas
• local infrastructure
• connection to general infrastructure networks
• estimated urban-development charges
• areas to be transferred for green spaces
• collective facilities
• and road infrastructure.

A detailed PIP normally requires more work before submission, but it can provide a more useful basis for:

• acquisition
• valuation
• finance
• investment approval
• design progression
• and the subsequent urban-planning procedure.

General PIP

BEST USED FOR

• preliminary feasibility
• early site testing
• clarification of the applicable planning framework
• confirmation of intended use
• identification of material constraints
• or determination of the likely procedural route.

DESIGN MATURITY

• site identification
• planning analysis
• initial development concept
• indicative use and scale
• preliminary access and infrastructure approach.

MAIN RISK

The municipal answer may remain too general to support the project’s financial assumptions.

Detailed PIP

BEST USED FOR

• acquisition conditions
• defined development capacity
• planning-value support
• investment approval
• lender review
• developed massing
• subdivision or urbanisation strategy
• or an intended route benefiting from the effects available to a sufficiently detailed favourable decision.

DESIGN MATURITY

• verified survey
• coordinated implantation
• defined areas and uses
• elevations or massing information
• access and parking strategy
• initial infrastructure strategy
• and a clear planning statement.

MAIN RISK

The project may become tied to assumptions that later prove technically, commercially or operationally unsuitable.

A useful PIP should convert the business plan into express planning questions.

Property

Identify:

• the property description
• Land Registry references
• property-tax references
• cadastral references where available
• site area
• boundaries
• existing buildings
• access
• adjoining ownership
• and any discrepancy between records.

Existing position

State:

• existing lawful use
• authorised construction
• occupied or vacant status
• existing infrastructure
• demolition proposed
• and whether any structure is to be retained.

Proposed urban operation

Define whether the proposal involves:

• new construction
• reconstruction
• extension
• alteration
• demolition
• change of use
• subdivision
• urbanisation
• land remodelling
• infrastructure
• or several coordinated operations.

Use

Ask whether the municipality accepts the proposed:

• residential use
• tourism use
• hotel use
• serviced-accommodation use
• office use
• retail use
• industrial or logistics use
• healthcare use
• senior-living use
• student accommodation
• mixed use
• or other defined activity.

Avoid generic labels where the operational model requires a more precise legal classification.

Development capacity

Identify the proposed:

• gross construction area
• above-ground area
• below-ground area
• footprint
• impermeable area
• plot-occupation index
• plot-utilisation index
• density
• number of units
• and relevant exclusions.

The terminology must be reconciled with the definitions used in the applicable municipal plan.

Building form

Ask for confirmation of:

• implantation
• alignment
• setbacks
• building height
• façade height
• number of floors
• underground floors
• roof form
• relationship to neighbouring buildings
• boundary walls
• and principal external spaces.

Unit schedule

State:

• number of dwellings
• accommodation units
• commercial units
• operator areas
• storage areas
• parking spaces
• technical areas
• common areas
• and ancillary structures.

Access, parking and circulation

Address:

• legal road access
• vehicle access
• pedestrian access
• emergency access
• parking quantity
• parking location
• loading
• servicing
• refuse collection
• bicycle facilities
• and internal circulation.

Infrastructure

Identify the proposed approach to:

• potable water
• wastewater
• stormwater
• electricity
• gas
• telecommunications
• fire-safety water
• waste
• energy infrastructure
• and connection to public systems.

Public land and infrastructure obligations

Ask whether the project will require:

• land transfers
• road widening
• public parking
• green spaces
• collective facilities
• infrastructure reinforcement
• urbanisation works
• or financial compensation.

Municipal charges

Request the available estimate or methodology concerning:

• urban-development charges
• compensation
• infrastructure charges
• and other applicable municipal amounts.

The result should still be treated as an estimate unless the decision expressly establishes otherwise.

External authorities

Identify all potential:

• consultations
• opinions
• approvals
• authorisations
• and protected-sector procedures.

Phasing

If the development will be phased, define:

• the overall scheme
• each phase
• infrastructure serving each phase
• independent operation
• completion conditions
• and land or title arrangements.

Subsequent procedure

Ask the municipality to identify the planning-control route expected to apply after the PIP.

The PIP should contain questions capable of receiving clear answers.

Examples include:

• Is the proposed residential and tourism use compatible with the applicable municipal plan?
• Does the municipality accept the proposed implantation shown on drawing PIP-AR-02?
• Is the proposed maximum above-ground construction area acceptable?
• Does the municipality accept the stated number of accommodation units?
• Are the proposed building height and number of floors compliant?
• Is the proposed vehicle access acceptable in principle?
• Is on-site parking required and, if so, on what basis?
• Will the project require land to be transferred to the municipality?
• Which local infrastructure works must be completed by the developer?
• Which external authorities must be consulted?
• What urban-planning procedure will apply to the subsequent project?
• Which conditions must be satisfied before that procedure is submitted?
• Does the decision recognise any statutory effect associated with a detailed favourable PIP?

A submission that merely asks whether “development is possible” may not protect the assumptions on which the project depends.

Build the PIP question schedule

A. Project identity

INPUT

• Property name
• Municipality
• Parish
• Land Registry references
• Total site area
• Applicant
• Owner

B. Proposed use

SELECT

• Residential
• Tourism
• Hotel
• Commercial
• Office
• Industrial or logistics
• Healthcare
• Senior living
• Student accommodation
• Mixed use
• Other

C. Proposed parameters

INPUT

• Above-ground construction area
• Below-ground construction area
• Footprint
• Building height
• Number of floors
• Number of units
• Parking spaces
• Public land transfer
• Infrastructure works

D. Decisions required

SELECT ALL THAT APPLY

• Use
• Capacity
• Implantation
• Height
• Architecture
• Access
• Parking
• Infrastructure
• External consultations
• Land transfers
• Charges
• Phasing
• Subsequent procedure

OUTPUT

• PIP decision-question schedule
• Missing-information list
• Parameters requiring drawings
• Parameters requiring technical advice
• Acquisition-critical questions
• Finance-critical questions

CTA

Generate the PIP scope

The correct level of design depends on the intended legal and commercial value of the PIP.

Early feasibility level

May include:

• verified site location
• initial constraints plan
• proposed use
• approximate construction area
• indicative building position
• indicative access
• and an explanation of the development concept.

This may support a general PIP but may be insufficient to secure detailed parameters.

Acquisition-decision level

Should normally include:

• topographical survey
• reconciled property boundary
• planning and constraints analysis
• proposed implantation
• massing
• uses
• area schedule
• unit schedule
• access and parking
• initial infrastructure strategy
• and the parameters used in the financial model.

Detailed-decision level

May require:

• developed architectural drawings
• design statement
• levels and sections
• façade information
• external-space strategy
• infrastructure concept
• land-transfer proposals
• phasing
• and initial input from relevant engineering disciplines.

Do not develop the wrong design in greater detail simply to make the submission appear complete.

First confirm:

• the correct site baseline
• the applicable planning definitions
• the questions requiring a formal decision
• and the commercial parameters that must remain flexible.

Planning, architectural, valuation and financial documents often use different definitions of area.

The PIP should identify how each figure has been calculated.

Record separately

• total site area
• developable site area
• building footprint
• gross construction area
• above-ground construction area
• below-ground construction area
• private area
• common area
• technical area
• parking area
• balconies and terraces
• covered external spaces
• saleable area
• lettable area
• and areas excluded under the applicable plan.

Reconciliation test

The following documents should use the same controlled source data:

• PIP application
• planning statement
• architectural drawings
• financial model
• valuation
• investment memorandum
• acquisition agreement
• and lender information package.

A favourable decision for one calculation cannot safely support an appraisal based on another.

The exact requirements depend on:

• the type of PIP
• the operation
• the municipality
• the property
• and the applicable legal regime at the submission date.

The current documentation framework is principally established by the RJUE and Portaria 71-A/2024.

A submission package may include:

Applicant and property documents

• applicant identification
• evidence of representation
• owner identification
• Land Registry certificate
• property-tax record
• cadastral information
• location plan
• municipal-plan extract
• and property photographs.

Existing-condition information

• topographical survey
• existing-building drawings
• authorised-use evidence
• municipal file information
• existing infrastructure
• and demolition or retention plan.

Planning documents

• planning statement
• applicable planning instruments
• planning-parameter schedule
• constraints map
• administrative-easement analysis
• and comparison between existing and proposed conditions.

Architectural documents

• implantation plan
• floor plans
• sections
• elevations
• massing
• area schedule
• unit schedule
• use schedule
• parking schedule
• and design statement.

Infrastructure information

• access note
• road and circulation plan
• water strategy
• wastewater strategy
• stormwater strategy
• utility connections
• and proposed public works.

Professional documentation

• responsibility statements
• professional qualifications
• digital signatures
• document index
• and other formal submission requirements.

The documents should be internally consistent and uploaded in the formats required by the relevant municipality.

A PIP should not be based on a desktop map alone.

The project team should compare:

• Land Registry description
• property-tax record
• cadastral information
• survey
• title documents
• physical occupation
• walls and fences
• municipal mapping
• and neighbouring properties.

Questions to resolve

• Does the registered property correspond to the occupied site?
• Is the stated site area reliable?
• Does the site include more than one registered property?
• Are there unregistered access routes or occupied areas?
• Does a public road cross or abut the property?
• Are watercourses correctly represented?
• Are existing buildings located inside the title boundary?
• Does the proposed implantation depend on disputed land?
• Does the project require land owned by another person?

A municipal planning decision does not correct defective title or create ownership over land outside the applicant’s rights.

A PIP can be an effective acquisition-risk tool, but it must be coordinated with the transaction documents.

The acquisition agreement should define

• who prepares the PIP
• who selects and instructs the design team
• who pays the costs
• who owns the resulting studies
• who controls the submission
• whether the seller may contact the municipality
• whether the application can be amended
• whether the application can be withdrawn
• what cooperation the seller must provide
• how municipal requests will be answered
• which result satisfies the acquisition condition
• the minimum accepted use, area, height or unit number
• treatment of conditions and infrastructure obligations
• treatment of an unfavourable or incomplete decision
• extension of the long-stop date
• appeal or resubmission rights
• transfer or use of the PIP after completion
• and what happens if the sale does not complete.

Define the minimum acceptable outcome

“Favourable PIP” may be too vague.

A decision may be described as favourable while requiring:

• fewer units
• less area
• a different use
• substantial infrastructure
• public land transfers
• expensive external studies
• or material redesign.

The acquisition condition should identify the parameters that determine whether the project remains viable.

Example commercial test

The buyer may require a decision confirming, subject only to defined acceptable conditions:

• the intended use
• at least the stated above-ground construction area
• at least the stated number of units
• the proposed height range
• acceptable vehicle access
• no public land transfer above the agreed threshold
• and no infrastructure obligation exceeding the agreed budget.

The actual drafting must be adapted to the transaction and legally reviewed.

Under the current RJUE, the municipality obtains external opinions, authorisations or approvals through the PIP where they would be required for the eventual licensing or prior-communication procedure.

The resulting external opinions form part of the PIP decision.

Potential entities may include authorities responsible for:

• cultural heritage
• nature conservation
• water resources
• coastal management
• agricultural reserves
• ecological reserves
• national or regional roads
• railways
• airports
• forests
• energy infrastructure
• civil protection
• and public-health matters.

Important limitations

The PIP does not necessarily determine every external approval required for the final project.

The project team should establish:

• whether the consultation is mandatory
• whether the authority’s opinion is binding
• which drawings and studies it requires
• whether the opinion covers the full project
• whether a separate procedure remains necessary
• and how long the opinion or approval remains usable.

Environmental-impact assessment

The current RJUE expressly excludes environmental-impact assessment from the consultations conducted within the PIP procedure.

Where the project may require screening or environmental-impact assessment, that pathway must be planned separately and coordinated with the PIP.

Relevant public systems include the Portuguese Environment Agency’s SIAIA portal and its guidance on the use of water resources.

Step 1 — Confirm the property baseline

Complete the essential title, boundary, existing-use and constraints investigation.

Step 2 — Define the investment questions

Identify which municipal conclusions are required before the project can proceed.

Step 3 — Select the PIP type

Choose between a general and detailed request based on the required level of certainty.

Step 4 — Appoint the team

Depending on the project, the team may include:

• architect
• planning consultant
• surveyor
• civil engineer
• infrastructure engineer
• traffic consultant
• environmental consultant
• heritage specialist
• cost consultant
• and legal counsel.

Step 5 — Consider pre-submission engagement

Where available and appropriate, discuss:

• submission format
• applicable planning instruments
• external consultations
• survey requirements
• and the municipality’s interpretation of the proposal.

An informal meeting does not replace a formal PIP decision.

Step 6 — Prepare the proposal

Develop the submission to the level required to answer the defined questions.

Step 7 — Complete quality control

Check:

• property references
• drawing references
• areas
• planning definitions
• uses
• unit numbers
• access
• infrastructure
• phasing
• and consistency across every document.

Step 8 — Submit

File the application through the applicable municipal channel and retain:

• submission receipt
• complete document set
• digital files
• fee evidence
• and version record.

Step 9 — Manage initial review

The municipality may identify:

• missing documents
• formal defects
• inconsistencies
• or additional information required for assessment.

Respond through a controlled process.

Step 10 — Monitor external consultations

Record:

• authority
• referral date
• documents consulted on
• statutory period
• response
• conditions
• and outstanding action.

Step 11 — Respond to clarifications

Before changing the proposal, determine whether the change affects:

• the commercial appraisal
• acquisition conditions
• authority consultations
• architectural coordination
• or the legal scope of the decision.

Step 12 — Receive and analyse the decision

Do not record the result simply as “approved” or “refused”.

Create a line-by-line decision and conditions schedule.

Step 13 — Protect the validity period

Record the date from which the decision’s statutory period is calculated and the deadline for the next procedure.

Step 14 — Progress the project

Prepare the subsequent project in strict coordination with:

• the PIP submission
• the municipal decision
• external opinions
• conditions
• and the applicable planning-control route.

Under the current RJUE, the statutory municipal decision period is generally:

• 20 days for a general PIP under Article 14(1)
• 30 days for a detailed PIP under Article 14(2).

The applicable counting rules depend on procedural events such as:

• valid submission
• delivery of requested elements
• receipt of external opinions
• or expiry of the relevant consultation periods.

The statutory period should not be treated as the complete project programme.

Indicative working programme

• property and planning review: 2–6 weeks
• topographical and existing-condition surveys: 2–8 weeks
• concept and PIP scope: 2–6 weeks
• developed detailed proposal: 4–12 weeks
• submission preparation and quality control: 1–3 weeks
• municipal validation and consultation: variable
• clarification or amendment: variable
• decision interpretation and next-stage planning: 1–3 weeks.

A complex PIP can take several months from initial instruction to a usable decision.

The acquisition long-stop date should reflect the practical programme, not only the statutory decision period.

Allow for:

• Land Registry and property documents
• topographical survey
• measured-building survey
• cadastral work
• architect
• planning consultant
• engineers
• infrastructure studies
• traffic and parking studies
• environmental studies
• heritage studies
• legal review
• municipal fees
• external-authority fees where applicable
• translations
• document certification
• digital submission
• response to clarifications
• design amendments
• and decision review.

A detailed PIP may reduce later planning risk but requires greater upfront design expenditure.

The correct comparison is between:

• the cost of obtaining useful information now
• and the financial exposure of acquiring or designing the wrong project.

Favourable decision

The municipality accepts the submitted operation or the parameters within the express scope of the decision.

The project team must still identify:

• conditions
• exclusions
• outstanding approvals
• subsequent procedure
• validity
• and consistency requirements.

Favourable decision with conditions

The proposal may proceed only if stated conditions are satisfied.

Each condition should be classified as:

• design requirement
• legal requirement
• external-authority requirement
• infrastructure obligation
• land-transfer obligation
• financial obligation
• pre-submission condition
• pre-construction condition
• or operational condition.

Partially favourable or ambiguous decision

The municipality may accept some elements without deciding others clearly.

Do not assume that silence on a parameter means approval.

Consider:

• clarification
• correction
• administrative review
• revised submission
• or contractual treatment of the uncertainty.

Unfavourable decision

Under the current RJUE, an unfavourable decision should, where possible, indicate how the proposal could be revised to comply with the applicable requirements.

The project team should distinguish between:

• a fundamental planning prohibition
• excessive development capacity
• unacceptable design
• infrastructure deficiency
• missing information
• external-authority objection
• and a problem that can be resolved through amendment.

Create a structured decision matrix.

Decision identification

Record:

• procedure number
• applicant
• property
• submission date
• decision date
• deciding body
• drawings and documents considered
• and decision notification date.

Project parameters

Record whether the decision expressly confirms:

• use
• construction area
• footprint
• height
• floors
• units
• implantation
• setbacks
• access
• parking
• infrastructure
• phasing
• land transfers
• and municipal charges.

External opinions

For each authority, record:

• documents reviewed
• conclusion
• whether the opinion is favourable
• conditions
• validity
• and additional procedures.

Conditions

For each condition, identify:

• exact wording
• legal basis
• project consequence
• cost consequence
• responsible person
• required evidence
• and deadline.

Procedural route

Record whether the municipality identifies:

• licensing
• prior communication
• exemption from prior control in a defined statutory case
• a subdivision or urbanisation procedure
• or another required procedure.

Omissions

List every acquisition or investment assumption not expressly answered.

Under the current RJUE, a favourable PIP binds the competent entities when deciding the subsequent licensing procedure and when exercising the successive control applicable to prior-communication operations.

That protection applies within the scope of:

• the submitted request
• the documents assessed
• the assumptions on which the decision was based
• the conditions imposed
• and the statutory validity period.

It should not be extended to a materially different project.

Defined exemption possibilities

In certain statutory circumstances, including qualifying detailed PIPs and projects in areas covered by specified detailed planning instruments or subdivision operations, the favourable decision may produce an effect associated with exemption from prior control.

This possibility must be confirmed specifically for the project.

Do not assume that:

• every detailed PIP produces the effect
• the PIP itself authorises immediate construction
• no further documents are required
• professional responsibility declarations are unnecessary
• municipal fees cease to apply
• or external requirements disappear.

Before relying on any exemption, obtain written confirmation of:

• the applicable legal provision
• the project documents covered
• the required commencement formalities
• the required professional declarations
• payment obligations
• inspections
• and any remaining external approvals.

Under the current RJUE, the urban operation benefiting from a favourable PIP must generally be initiated within two years of the favourable decision.

After that period, the interested party may request a declaration that the factual and legal assumptions remain unchanged.

The current regime provides a 20-day period for the municipal president to decide that request. Where the assumptions are maintained, or where the applicable statutory effect follows from the absence of a timely answer, a further one-year period applies for submission of the relevant licensing or prior-communication procedure.

The exact deadline must be calculated for the specific case.

Validity calendar

Record:

• decision date
• notification date
• date on which the period begins
• initial two-year deadline
• design-completion target
• intended submission date
• latest safe submission date
• date for any confirmation request
• confirmation decision deadline
• and any further one-year deadline.

Do not wait until the final weeks to test whether the project remains consistent with the PIP.

The current RJUE contains protection for certain subsequent procedures relying on a favourable PIP where new planning rules emerge during specified plan-preparation or revision stages.

The protection is technical and depends on:

• the status of the relevant territorial plan
• the date of the PIP
• the date of the subsequent application
• the scope of the favourable decision
• and compliance with statutory deadlines.

It should not be reduced to the statement that “a PIP freezes the planning rules”.

Where a municipal or intermunicipal plan is under preparation, amendment, revision, suspension or public discussion, obtain a project-specific legal analysis before relying on the PIP.

The applicable territorial instruments can be investigated through the National Territorial Information System — SNIT and the current RJIGT.

The later project should be checked against the PIP through a controlled comparison.

Potentially material changes include

• different use
• additional area
• reduced setbacks
• increased height
• additional floors
• more units
• changed implantation
• different vehicle access
• reduced parking
• altered infrastructure
• revised land transfers
• changed phasing
• or modification of an element reviewed by an external authority.

Change-control questions

• Is the change within the parameters accepted by the decision?
• Does it affect an express condition?
• Does it require renewed external consultation?
• Does it change the applicable planning procedure?
• Does it affect the acquisition agreement?
• Does it affect valuation or finance?
• Is clarification or a new PIP appropriate?
• Could reliance on the favourable decision be lost?

Minor design development may be compatible with the PIP, but material changes should not be assumed to be protected.

A lender or investor should receive the complete PIP record, not only the favourable decision page.

Information package

Include:

• PIP application
• all submitted drawings
• planning statement
• area schedule
• municipal requests
• applicant responses
• external opinions
• municipal reports where available
• final decision
• conditions schedule
• validity calendar
• subsequent-procedure analysis
• and comparison with the current project.

Reconciliation checks

Confirm that:

• the financial model uses the PIP areas
• the valuation uses the same use and unit schedule
• the construction budget covers all conditions
• the programme protects the validity deadline
• infrastructure obligations are included
• public land transfers are reflected in the site area
• and the design has not moved beyond the protected parameters.

A favourable PIP can reduce planning risk, but it does not eliminate:

• title risk
• construction risk
• cost risk
• finance risk
• market risk
• environmental risk
• or delivery risk.

Score each category before submission.

Property certainty

• High: title, boundary and existing buildings are reconciled.
• Medium: minor discrepancies remain.
• Low: site area, access or ownership is uncertain.

Planning certainty

• High: applicable plan and parameters are clear.
• Medium: interpretation is required.
• Low: use or development principle is uncertain.

Design maturity

• High: coordinated proposal and controlled area schedule.
• Medium: developed concept with limited technical input.
• Low: indicative massing without verified constraints.

Infrastructure certainty

• High: connections and capacity are supported.
• Medium: initial discussions completed.
• Low: access or utility provision remains speculative.

External-authority certainty

• High: relevant authorities and requirements are identified.
• Medium: consultations are expected but not tested.
• Low: protected-sector implications remain unknown.

Transaction exposure

• High risk: unconditional acquisition before decision.
• Medium risk: partial contractual protection.
• Lower risk: clearly defined planning condition, cooperation provisions and realistic long-stop date.

OUTPUT

• Current PIP-readiness rating
• Critical missing information
• Recommended PIP type
• Required specialist input
• Acquisition protections required
• Submission hold points

Proceed with submission only when the following questions can be answered.

Property

• Is the correct property being assessed?
• Are the title and survey sufficiently reconciled?
• Is lawful access confirmed?
• Is the existing use and construction position understood?
• Are third-party rights identified?

Planning

• Have all applicable territorial plans been identified?
• Are planning definitions correctly applied?
• Are administrative easements and public restrictions mapped?
• Is the intended use precisely described?
• Are planning changes under preparation being monitored?

Proposal

• Is the proposed implantation defined?
• Are areas reconciled?
• Are height and floor numbers clear?
• Are units and uses scheduled?
• Is access workable?
• Is the infrastructure strategy credible?
• Is phasing explained?

Decision questions

• Does each commercial assumption correspond to an express question?
• Can the municipality answer each question from the submitted information?
• Are primary and fallback positions clearly separated?
• Would a favourable answer support the acquisition or investment decision?

External authorities

• Have the relevant authorities been identified?
• Are the required studies available?
• Is environmental-impact assessment relevant?
• Does the programme allow for separate procedures?

Transaction

• Is the seller required to cooperate?
• Does the contract define the acceptable PIP outcome?
• Is the long-stop date realistic?
• Are design ownership and use rights clear?
• Can the buyer withdraw if the result is commercially unacceptable?

Procedure

• Is the correct PIP type selected?
• Are the formal documents complete?
• Are professional responsibility terms in place?
• Is there a controlled response process?
• Is the validity period built into the programme?

Asking a question that is too broad

A general request can produce an answer that does not confirm the development capacity used in the appraisal.

Submitting the maximum imaginable scheme

An excessive proposal may delay the procedure and provoke an avoidable unfavourable response.

The submitted scheme should be ambitious but technically and legally supportable.

Failing to define the intended use

Terms such as “tourism”, “accommodation” or “residential services” may not identify the legal and operational use precisely enough.

Using an unreliable site area

A difference in the site boundary can change:

• construction capacity
• setbacks
• infrastructure
• access
• land transfers
• and the financial model.

Ignoring the existing lawful position

Existing floor area or use should not be assumed to be lawful because it appears in tax, registry or commercial documents.

Inconsistent areas

Different numbers across drawings, schedules and the planning statement weaken the submission and the value of the decision.

Omitting infrastructure

A favourable planning principle may have limited commercial value if water, wastewater, access or stormwater obligations make the project unaffordable.

Treating informal comments as approval

A meeting, email or technical comment is not equivalent to a formal PIP decision.

Assuming every positive decision has the same legal effect

The effect depends on the type of PIP, its contents, the property, the applicable plan and the decision wording.

Ignoring external opinions

A decision may be favourable only subject to conditions imposed by another authority.

Accepting vague acquisition wording

“Subject to favourable PIP” may not protect the buyer where the decision approves a materially smaller or more expensive project.

Letting the PIP expire

A favourable decision has limited value if the next procedure is not initiated within the applicable period.

Changing the project without checking reliance

Material changes can move the project outside the scope protected by the PIP.

Treating the PIP as permission to construct

Construction should not begin merely because a favourable prior-information decision has been issued.

Before submission, confirm that you have:

• identified the applicant
• identified the registered owner
• obtained current Land Registry information
• obtained the property-tax record
• reconciled the property boundary
• completed the required survey
• reviewed the existing lawful position
• identified the applicable territorial plans
• mapped planning constraints
• mapped administrative easements
• defined the proposed urban operation
• defined the intended use
• prepared the planning-parameter schedule
• prepared the area schedule
• defined the implantation
• defined height and floors
• defined units and ancillary areas
• developed the access strategy
• developed the parking strategy
• reviewed infrastructure availability
• identified possible land transfers
• considered municipal charges
• identified external authorities
• considered environmental procedures
• selected a general or detailed PIP
• prepared the decision questions
• completed drawing coordination
• completed technical and legal quality control
• agreed the acquisition protections
• agreed design and document ownership
• established the response protocol
• established the conditions tracker
• established the validity calendar
• and identified the expected subsequent procedure.

Is a PIP mandatory?

Not in every development.

A PIP is generally a strategic mechanism used to obtain prior municipal information before progressing to the subsequent planning-control procedure.

Whether it is useful depends on the uncertainty, project stage, required investment and commercial decisions.

Must I own the property?

Not necessarily.

Under the current RJUE, any interested party may submit a PIP. Where the applicant is not the owner, the owner and other relevant right holders must be identified through the required property documentation and are notified of the procedure.

Can the owner prevent a potential buyer from submitting a PIP?

The planning legislation permits an interested party to request prior information, subject to the applicable submission requirements.

However, access to the property, use of seller documents, survey work, confidentiality and contractual restrictions may affect what the potential buyer can prepare and submit.

Will the owner be told about the PIP?

Where the applicant is not the owner, the current regime requires the relevant owner and right holders to be identified, and the municipality notifies them that the procedure has been initiated.

What is the difference between a general and detailed PIP?

A general PIP tests overall feasibility and principal constraints.

A detailed PIP presents defined development parameters and may cover matters such as architecture, implantation, height, uses, areas, units, infrastructure, charges and land transfers.

How long should a PIP take?

Under the current RJUE, the statutory decision period is generally 20 days for a general request and 30 days for a detailed request, subject to the applicable counting rules.

Preparation, document validation, external consultations, requests for information and amendments can make the complete process substantially longer.

Does a favourable PIP guarantee the final project will be approved?

It binds the competent entities within its legal scope and validity period, but it does not protect:

• matters omitted from the request
• material project changes
• unfulfilled conditions
• separate statutory procedures
• or submissions made outside the applicable period.

Does a favourable PIP allow construction to start?

Normally, no.

The subsequent planning-control procedure, professional documents, fees, communications, external approvals and other commencement requirements must still be confirmed.

Can a detailed PIP remove the need for a licence or prior communication?

Defined statutory cases may produce an exemption-related effect, but this is not automatic for every detailed PIP.

The exact legal effect and remaining commencement formalities must be confirmed for the specific project.

Can a PIP confirm the exact municipal charges?

A detailed request may include an estimate of urban-development charges.

The project should still allow for changes arising from:

• final design
• updated municipal regulations
• infrastructure requirements
• indexation
• and the date of the subsequent procedure.

Does the PIP include environmental-impact assessment?

No.

Under the current RJUE, environmental-impact assessment is excluded from the consultations conducted within the PIP procedure.

What happens if the municipality refuses the PIP?

The current regime provides that, where possible, the municipality should indicate how the proposal may be revised to comply.

The applicant should identify whether the refusal results from:

• a fundamental prohibition
• excessive development
• design
• infrastructure
• missing information
• or an external-authority position.

Can the PIP be changed after submission?

Amendment may be possible, but a material change can affect:

• processing time
• external consultations
• the decision scope
• acquisition deadlines
• and statutory treatment.

The procedure should be confirmed before submitting a revised proposal.

Can the PIP be transferred to a purchaser?

The practical use of the decision by a successor should be coordinated with:

• acquisition documents
• applicant and property status
• intellectual-property rights
• the subsequent procedure
• and the municipality’s administrative requirements.

Do not assume that possession of the decision letter is sufficient.

How long is a favourable PIP valid?

Under the current regime, the operation must generally be initiated within two years.

A statutory mechanism may provide a further one-year period where the continued factual and legal assumptions are confirmed or where the applicable legal effect follows from the municipality’s failure to decide in time.

The deadline should be legally calculated and actively monitored.

Does a PIP protect the project against a new municipal plan?

The current RJUE provides protection in defined circumstances, but it is not an unlimited freeze of planning law.

The result depends on the dates, plan status, PIP scope, subsequent procedure and compliance with statutory periods.

PIP Need Selector

Determine whether the project should proceed directly, submit a general PIP, prepare a detailed PIP or resolve missing evidence first.

CTA

Assess the need for a PIP

PIP Type Comparator

Compare the cost, design maturity, questions and potential legal effects of a general and detailed PIP.

CTA

Compare PIP types

PIP Question Builder

Convert the project assumptions into a structured schedule of municipal decision questions.

CTA

Build the PIP questions

PIP Area Schedule

Reconcile planning, architectural, saleable, lettable, private, common, parking and technical areas.

CTA

Build the area schedule

PIP Submission Checklist

Organise applicant, property, planning, architecture, infrastructure and professional documents.

CTA

Prepare the submission

Authority Consultation Map

Identify the external authorities and protected-sector procedures potentially affecting the project.

CTA

Map the consultations

PIP Conditions Tracker

Record every municipal and external-authority condition, its owner, cost, evidence and deadline.

CTA

Track the conditions

PIP Validity Calendar

Calculate project milestones against the decision period and the intended subsequent submission.

CTA

Protect the PIP validity

TOOL DISCLAIMER

These tools provide preliminary organisational guidance only. They do not determine planning rights, guarantee a municipal decision, calculate statutory deadlines or replace professional legal, architectural, planning, engineering, environmental or municipal advice.

PLANNING & LICENSING — GUIDE 04

Licence or Prior Communication

Identify the planning-control route that applies after the feasibility and development parameters have been established.

The next guide explains licensing, prior communication, exemptions, required documents, professional responsibilities, municipal processing, tacit decisions and the procedural changes scheduled for October 2026.

PRIMARY CTA

Continue to Licence or Prior Communication

SECONDARY CTA

Return to Planning & Licensing

Turn the development concept into a usable municipal decision

VVA can support investors, developers, funds, family offices, operators and landowners in the preparation, submission and commercial use of Portuguese prior-information requests.

Support may include:

• planning and legal due diligence
• property and planning-document review
• PIP strategy
• general and detailed PIP scoping
• acquisition-condition drafting
• coordination with architects and consultants
• preparation of decision questions
• review of planning parameters
• external-authority strategy
• owner and applicant arrangements
• review of municipal requests
• submission amendments
• interpretation of decisions
• conditions tracking
• validity monitoring
• coordination with investment and finance documents
• and preparation of the subsequent urban-planning procedure.

PRIMARY CTA

Request a PIP strategy review

SECONDARY CTA

Speak with VVA