Phase 02 of 08

Site screening

Site screening is the first structured review of a specific property or existing development project.

Screen a site or project Open the due diligence checklist

02Site screening

At a glance

Indicative duration: 1–3 weeks per site
The decision: Does this site or existing project have a sufficiently credible legal, planning, physical and commercial basis to justify full feasibility and due diligence?
Documents: PDM extract and constraints plan for the plot.
Land registry extract and tax record.
A one-page screening note per site with a go / no-go recommendation.
Tools for this phase: Project Due Diligence Checklist Compare Development Locations Development Feasibility Check

The decision this phase helps you make

Does this site or existing project have a sufficiently credible legal, planning, physical and commercial basis to justify full feasibility and due diligence?

Site screening should produce one of four outcomes:

Proceed — no immediate disqualifying issue has been identified. The site can move to feasibility and full due diligence.
Proceed subject to conditions — the opportunity may be viable, but specified matters must be confirmed before any unconditional commitment.
Pause — the available information is insufficient or inconsistent. Further documents, surveys or professional input are required.
Reject — a material issue appears incompatible with the strategy, intended use, risk policy or financial requirements.

A positive screening result is not planning approval, a valuation or a legal opinion. It means only that the site appears suitable for further investigation on the information currently available.

01Site screening is not full due diligence

Screening is an initial filter.

It should be proportionate, fast and focused on the issues capable of changing the decision to proceed.

Full due diligence is more detailed and may involve:

legal title review;
planning due diligence;
technical surveys;
environmental investigations;
tax review;
corporate due diligence;
contract review;
valuation;
detailed feasibility;
advice from the municipality or other authorities;
confirmation from infrastructure providers.

A developer should not rely on an initial screening report as a substitute for those investigations.

The screening report should clearly distinguish between:

confirmed information;
information provided by the seller;
professional assumptions;
matters inferred from public sources;
documents not yet obtained;
questions requiring verification.

021. Identify the property precisely

The first task is to establish which property is actually being offered.

Request and compare, as applicable:

current land-registry certificate;
property-tax record;
cadastral information;
BUPi georeferencing information for relevant rural or mixed properties;
topographic survey;
site plan;
aerial imagery;
existing architectural or planning drawings;
boundaries shown on the ground;
coordinates;
total registered and measured areas.

These records have different purposes and should not be treated as interchangeable.

The land-registry description records the registered legal position. The property-tax record is primarily a tax document. Cadastral or georeferencing information helps identify the physical location and boundaries. A topographic survey records the site as measured by the relevant professional.

The descriptions, areas and boundaries may not always correspond.

A discrepancy does not automatically make development impossible, but it must be identified and investigated. It may affect:

ownership;
price;
building parameters;
access;
planning submissions;
financing;
the acquisition contract;
later sale or subdivision.

Initial questions

Does the seller’s plan correspond to the registered property?
Are all parcels included?
Are any adjoining parcels required?
Are there apparent overlaps or gaps?
Does the physical occupation match the documents?
Are the boundaries marked and accepted?
Is a boundary or area correction required?
Is the property composed of urban, rural or mixed components?

032. Confirm ownership and registered rights

Obtain a current land-registry certificate and identify:

registered owner;
registered property description;
acquisitions;
mortgages;
attachments;
seizures;
usufruct or use rights;
surface rights;
easements;
restrictive registrations;
pending registration requests;
other registered charges or encumbrances.

The registered owner should be compared with:

the proposed seller;
the tax record;
corporate records, where the owner is a company;
powers of attorney;
inheritance or succession documents;
marital-property information where relevant.

The screening should also ask whether there are:

leases;
licences to occupy;
agricultural use arrangements;
informal occupants;
rights granted to neighbours;
utility arrangements;
litigation;
expropriation or public-infrastructure processes;
contractual promises affecting the property;
statutory or contractual pre-emption rights.

Not every relevant issue appears in the land registry. Physical inspection, seller disclosure and contractual due diligence remain necessary.

Red flag — the person negotiating the sale is not the registered owner and cannot clearly demonstrate authority to act.

043. Check possession, occupation and boundaries

Legal ownership and practical control are not always the same.

Visit the property and record:

who occupies it;
how it is used;
existing buildings and structures;
fences and walls;
visible boundary markers;
agricultural activity;
stored materials;
informal access routes;
neighbouring occupation;
possible encroachments;
signs of dumping or contamination;
watercourses, wells or drainage channels;
visible infrastructure.

Ask whether any person claims:

a lease;
an agricultural tenancy;
a right of way;
a right to use water;
access through the property;
occupation of a building;
ownership of a structure;
use of part of the land.

Unresolved occupation can affect vacant possession, construction access, financing and completion of the acquisition.

Red flag — the land-registry plan, seller’s plan and visible occupation appear to describe different areas.

054. Establish lawful and practical access

A development site needs more than a visible track or an informal route.

The screening should distinguish between:

direct access to a public road;
access through another property;
a registered easement;
an informal route used by tolerance;
pedestrian access;
construction access;
permanent operational access;
access suitable for emergency services;
access that satisfies the intended planning and design requirements.

Consider:

road ownership;
road width;
turning capacity;
gradients;
junction requirements;
visibility;
heavy-vehicle access;
fire-service requirements;
future road works;
land required for widening;
whether third-party land is needed.

A site may be physically reachable but still lack a legally secure or technically sufficient access for the intended development.

Red flag — the project depends on access across third-party land without a documented right or acquisition route.

065. Review the planning framework

The screening should identify the territorial plans and planning rules that appear to apply.

These may include:

the municipal master plan — PDM;
urbanisation plans;
detailed plans;
allotment permits;
execution units;
special territorial programmes;
urban-rehabilitation instruments;
municipal building regulations;
other applicable territorial instruments.

Review both the relevant maps and written regulations.

Identify, on an initial basis:

land classification and qualification;
permitted or compatible uses;
building index or intensity;
site-coverage limits;
maximum height or number of floors;
setbacks;
density;
parking;
public-space requirements;
infrastructure requirements;
possible land cessions or compensation;
rehabilitation or heritage rules;
whether the project depends on reclassification or a plan change.

A colour shown on a PDM map is not enough to calculate what can be built.

Planning potential may depend on:

the exact property boundary;
existing urbanisation;
infrastructure;
minimum plot characteristics;
the relationship with surrounding development;
the type of urban operation;
conditions in the written regulation;
restrictions shown in separate plans;
municipal interpretation;
opinions from other authorities.

Red flag — the seller’s stated building area cannot be traced to a current planning instrument, municipal decision or technically supported calculation.

076. Identify constraints and public-law restrictions

A site may be affected by restrictions that operate alongside the municipal plan.

The initial screen should consider, where relevant:

Reserva Ecológica Nacional — REN;
Reserva Agrícola Nacional — RAN;
protected areas;
Natura 2000;
public water domain;
coastal protection programmes;
flood and water-risk areas;
dams and reservoirs;
heritage protection;
classified buildings and protection zones;
archaeology;
national and municipal roads;
railway infrastructure;
airports and aeronautical restrictions;
electricity, gas, water and communications infrastructure;
pipelines;
military restrictions;
forestry and wildfire requirements;
noise zones;
environmental-assessment requirements;
other administrative easements or restrictions of public utility.

The presence of a restriction does not always prohibit development. It may:

limit the developable area;
require an opinion or authorisation;
impose design conditions;
increase investigation costs;
extend the programme;
require mitigation;
make the intended project impractical.

Different authorities may be responsible for different restrictions.

Red flag — the project’s assumed building footprint or access crosses an area subject to an unresolved restriction.

087. Review existing buildings

If the property contains buildings, confirm:

whether they appear in the registry and tax records;
whether their location and area correspond to the available documents;
their stated use;
planning and construction history;
available architectural drawings;
licences, communications or other applicable records;
completion or use documentation;
alterations;
enforcement matters;
structural condition;
occupancy;
heritage significance;
demolition restrictions;
utility connections.

Do not assume that an old building is lawful merely because it has existed for many years or appears in a tax record.

Equally, the absence of a modern document does not, by itself, determine that a building is unlawful. The applicable legal framework, date of construction, municipal records and later works must be reviewed.

Red flag — the proposed development depends on preserving existing building area, but the legality or extent of that area has not been confirmed.

098. Review existing project rights and documents

Where the opportunity is sold as an “approved project”, “licensed project” or “ready-to-build project”, request the complete project file.

This may include:

prior information request and decision;
architectural submissions;
municipal decisions;
licence or prior-communication records;
fee notices and payment receipts;
specialist projects;
responsibility statements;
external opinions;
urbanisation documents;
infrastructure agreements;
guarantees;
approved or submitted drawings;
conditions;
extensions;
commencement communications;
site records;
construction contracts;
consultant appointments;
sales or reservation commitments.

Confirm:

which entity submitted the project;
which property it relates to;
what was decided;
which drawings form part of the relevant file;
whether conditions remain outstanding;
whether deadlines have expired;
whether extensions were obtained;
whether fees were paid;
whether construction began;
whether the built or proposed project corresponds to the documents;
whether existing contracts or project documents can be used by the purchaser;
whether intellectual-property or consultant-consent issues arise.

A presentation drawing, broker’s brochure or seller’s statement is not evidence of an effective planning position.

Red flag — the seller describes the project as approved but supplies only architectural images or an incomplete municipal communication.

109. Check infrastructure and utilities

Establish the apparent availability and capacity of:

water;
wastewater drainage;
stormwater drainage;
electricity;
gas, where relevant;
telecommunications;
road access;
waste collection;
fire-fighting infrastructure.

Do not assume that a nearby network can serve the proposed development.

The screening should identify whether the project may require:

network reinforcement;
pumping;
a transformer or substation;
reservoirs;
off-site drainage;
road works;
utility easements;
land outside the property;
urbanisation works;
agreements with providers;
guarantees or municipal requirements.

Infrastructure cost and timing can make an otherwise viable site unworkable.

Red flag — the feasibility assumption relies on connections whose availability, route or capacity has not been confirmed.

1110. Review physical and environmental conditions

The initial technical screen should consider:

topography;
slopes;
retaining structures;
geology;
geotechnical risk;
groundwater;
drainage;
flooding;
erosion;
coastal exposure;
soil contamination;
previous industrial or agricultural use;
underground structures;
demolition;
asbestos or other hazardous materials;
trees and vegetation;
protected habitats;
archaeology;
noise;
sunlight and orientation;
neighbouring buildings;
fire risk;
construction logistics.

Some issues can be screened visually or through public information. Others require surveys or investigations by qualified professionals.

The screening report should specify which further investigations are recommended, such as:

topographic survey;
boundary survey;
geotechnical investigation;
contamination assessment;
flood or drainage study;
structural survey;
tree survey;
environmental assessment;
archaeological assessment;
utility-capacity enquiries.

Red flag — the project’s cost plan assumes standard construction conditions despite clear evidence of abnormal topography, demolition, retaining works, groundwater or uncertain ground conditions.

1211. Test commercial fit

A site can be legally and physically capable of development but commercially unsuitable for the intended product.

The initial commercial screen should consider:

target customer;
competing developments;
achievable product;
unit or room mix;
likely sale prices, rents or room rates;
absorption;
seasonality;
operating costs;
operator demand;
institutional demand;
exit liquidity;
delivery timing.

The developer should ask whether the intended project is suitable for the location, rather than whether some form of development might be possible.

Red flag — the financial case depends on pricing taken from a different product, location, specification or delivery period.

1312. Run a first financial screen

A first financial model should be prepared using clearly identified assumptions.

Include, where relevant:

proposed acquisition price;
acquisition taxes and costs;
assumed gross building area;
assumed saleable, lettable or operational area;
area efficiency;
project mix;
demolition;
construction;
infrastructure;
professional fees;
municipal costs;
financing;
irrecoverable VAT;
contingency;
marketing and sales;
operator mobilisation;
completion and exit costs;
programme;
revenue.

The output should not be presented as a valuation.

Its purpose is to identify:

the land value supported by the project;
which assumptions drive the result;
which missing information is material;
whether there is sufficient margin to absorb risk;
whether the asking price is compatible with a realistic development case.

Red flag — the site only appears viable when the maximum revenue, maximum area, shortest programme and lowest cost assumptions are all used together.

14Minimum documents to request

Property identification

Current land-registry certificate.
Current property-tax record.
Cadastral or georeferencing information, where available.
Topographic or boundary survey.
Site plan and coordinates.

+Show details(4)

Ownership and occupation

Seller identification or corporate documents.
Power of attorney, where applicable.
Leases, licences or occupation agreements.
Easement and access documents.
Information on litigation or claims.

Planning

Applicable planning information.
Prior information decisions.
Planning submissions.
Municipal decisions and notifications.
Licence or prior-communication records.
Fee records.
Existing drawings.
External opinions.
Enforcement or inspection communications.

Technical

Surveys and investigations.
Utility information.
Structural reports.
Geotechnical reports.
Environmental reports.
Energy or technical certificates.
As-built information.

Existing project or company

Project contracts.
Consultant appointments.
Construction contracts.
Guarantees.
Funding documents.
Corporate records.
Tax and accounting information.
Sales, reservation, lease or operator commitments.

The required documents will depend on the project. This list is not exhaustive.

15Site-screening scorecard

Assess each category as:

Green — no immediate concern identified;
Amber — material question requiring confirmation;
Red — potential disqualifying issue;
Unknown — insufficient information.

Score:

Property identification
Ownership
Occupation
Boundaries
Access
Planning use
Development parameters
Constraints
Existing buildings
Existing project rights
Infrastructure
Ground and environmental conditions
Market fit
Initial financial viability
Acquisition structure

A site should not receive an overall “green” result if a material category remains unknown. Unknown information is not neutral. It is a risk that still has to be investigated.

Decision gate

Site screening is complete when the developer can answer:

Have we identified the correct property?
Is the seller entitled to negotiate its sale?
Do the registered, tax and physical records broadly correspond?
Is there legally and practically suitable access?
What planning instruments appear to apply?
Is the intended use potentially compatible?
What development parameters are being assumed?
Which constraints affect the site?
Are existing buildings or project rights material?
What infrastructure appears available?
Which technical investigations are required?
Does the location fit the intended product?
Does the first financial screen justify further work?
What must be confirmed before signing or paying?

The answer does not need to be positive in every category. It must be sufficiently clear to support the next decision.

Red flags at this phase

The person negotiating the sale is not the registered owner and cannot demonstrate authority to act.
The land-registry plan, seller’s plan and visible occupation describe different areas.
The project depends on access across third-party land without a documented right.
The stated building area cannot be traced to a planning instrument or municipal decision.
The assumed footprint or access crosses an unresolved restriction.
The scheme depends on existing building area whose legality is unconfirmed.
The “approved project” is evidenced only by images or an incomplete communication.
Feasibility relies on utility connections whose capacity has not been confirmed.
The cost plan assumes standard conditions despite abnormal ground or demolition.
Pricing is taken from a different product, location or delivery period.
The site only works when every optimistic assumption is used together.

Indicative timing and costs

A basic site screen may take approximately one to four weeks after the essential documents are available.

More time may be required where:

the property comprises several parcels;
ownership is unclear;
boundaries are disputed;
municipal records must be obtained;
external restrictions apply;
existing project rights must be reconstructed;
technical investigations are required;
the opportunity involves a company acquisition;
information is incomplete or inconsistent.

There is no standard screening cost. The investigation budget should reflect the potential exposure and may include legal review, planning review, architect or planning-consultant input, topographic survey, technical inspection, engineering, market research, preliminary cost advice and environmental input. A low-cost screening is only useful if it addresses the issues capable of changing the investment decision.

Common mistakes

1Relying on the estate agent’s brochure.
2Treating the tax record as proof of title.
3Assuming the registered area matches the physical property.
4Ignoring occupation or informal use.
5Treating physical access as a legally secure right of access.
6Reading only the PDM map.
7Ignoring written planning regulations.
8Treating the seller’s building-area calculation as confirmed.
9Assuming an old building is automatically lawful.
10Assuming an “approved project” remains valid and usable.
11Ignoring REN, RAN, heritage, coastal or environmental constraints.
12Assuming nearby utilities have sufficient capacity.
13Using generic construction costs despite abnormal site conditions.
14Paying a non-refundable amount before material risks are reviewed.
15Allowing the design concept to advance before confirming the planning envelope.
16Treating missing information as evidence that no problem exists.

Site-screening checklist

Before moving to Feasibility, confirm that you have:

Progress: 0/25

Progress is saved in this browser only.

Frequently asked questions

Is site screening the same as due diligence?

No. Screening determines whether the opportunity justifies full investigation. Due diligence verifies the legal, planning, technical, tax, corporate and contractual position in greater detail.

Can I rely on the land-registry certificate alone?

No. The land registry is fundamental, but site screening should also consider tax, cadastral, physical, planning, occupation, access, infrastructure and technical information.

Does registration in the tax records prove that a building is lawful?

Not by itself. Tax registration and urban-planning legality serve different purposes. The relevant planning history and municipal records must be reviewed.

Can a PDM map confirm exactly how much can be built?

Not normally on its own. The applicable written regulations, constraints, property characteristics, infrastructure and type of urban operation must also be considered.

Is an old planning approval still valid?

Not necessarily. Its scope, conditions, dates, extensions, subsequent procedures, fee position and relationship with the current project must be checked.

Should I make an offer before screening the site?

A non-binding or expressly conditional commercial proposal may be used in some transactions. The developer should avoid becoming unconditionally committed or paying an inadequately protected amount before material risks are understood.

What if the seller refuses to provide documents?

Record the missing information as a material risk. The developer may pause the review, make any proposal expressly conditional on satisfactory due diligence or decide not to proceed.

Can screening confirm the final land value?

No. It can support an initial residual-value assessment, but the result remains dependent on planning, area, cost, programme, revenue and finance assumptions that require further verification.

Tools for this phase

Project Due Diligence Checklist

Track the documents, evidence and professional checks required before commitment.

Open the checklist

Compare Development Locations

Compare the site’s regional context, demand, infrastructure and project fit.

Compare locations

Development Feasibility Check

Test the first area, cost, programme and revenue assumptions for the screened site.

Start a feasibility check

Next phase

03 — Feasibility

Test whether the site remains viable when planning capacity, area efficiency, development cost, programme, funding and revenue are assessed together.

Continue to Feasibility

Legal support through VVA

Have you found a site or existing project?

Before signing, reserving or paying a deposit, confirm the property, title, planning position, restrictions, project documents and conditions that may affect value or delivery. Requests for professional legal support are handled by Valente Veiga & Associados.

Legal services are provided by Valente Veiga & Associados.

Send an email Explore legal support About VVA

Official sources

Regime Jurídico da Urbanização e da Edificação — Decreto-Lei n.º 555/99, in its current consolidated version.
Regime Jurídico dos Instrumentos de Gestão Territorial — Decreto-Lei n.º 80/2015, in its current consolidated version.
Instituto dos Registos e do Notariado — land-registry certificates and property-registration information.
Direção-Geral do Território — SNIT territorial-plan information.
BUPi — identification, georeferencing and registration of rural and mixed properties.
Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente — SNIAmb environmental and geographic information.
Applicable municipal plans and regulations.
Official information from the authorities responsible for any site-specific restrictions.

Last reviewed: 21 August 2026

This page provides general information about initial development-site screening in Portugal. It is not legal, planning, tax, environmental, engineering, valuation or investment advice. Public map viewers and seller-provided documents do not replace site-specific professional review or confirmation from the competent authorities.

Site screening

The decision this phase helps you make

01Site screening is not full due diligence#

021. Identify the property precisely#

Initial questions

032. Confirm ownership and registered rights#

043. Check possession, occupation and boundaries#

054. Establish lawful and practical access#

065. Review the planning framework#

076. Identify constraints and public-law restrictions#

087. Review existing buildings#

098. Review existing project rights and documents#

109. Check infrastructure and utilities#

1110. Review physical and environmental conditions#

1211. Test commercial fit#

1312. Run a first financial screen#

14Minimum documents to request#