On 16 December the Government took the next step in its continuing programme of planning reform, in the form of a draft new National Planning Policy Framework which it describes as being of “critical importance”.
We say ‘new’ deliberately: this is the first comprehensive re-write of the NPPF since it was first introduced by the Coalition Government in 2012. In style and format it is quite different, with each topic now drafted as policy text, rather than straight prose. In doing so, the Government has also introduced a clear distinction between policies that should be used for plan-making, and policies that should be used for making planning decisions at a development management stage.
That the Government has decided, for now, not to use new powers in the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act to give these policies the coveted legal “development plan” status is something most commentators fear could lead to unnecessary ambiguity, although the Government clearly hopes that this will be addressed by clear instruction that the policies are a material consideration of “critical importance”.
The substantive changes are extensive, across most areas of the planning system. Their implications, and their potentially unexpected interactions, will take some time to be fully analysed and understood. Much initial commentary has been focused on the implications of the new NPPF for housing supply, green belt release and the continued implication of the ‘grey belt’ policy, as well as the new ‘in principle’ support now provided for development near some railway stations which has attracted significant attention.
The key change proposed, under the banner of “Achieving Sustainable Development”, is a more focused approach to the presumption in favour of development. The key question will be whether a site is within, or without, a settlement boundary. Development within a settlement “should be approved” unless the benefits would be “substantially outweighed” by any adverse effects.
Conversely, only certain limited types of development should be approved outside a settlement boundary, such as tourism, agriculture and forestry, allocated sites, redevelopment of previously developed land, and development to meet evidenced unmet need. That could include housing where a housing supply cannot be shown, but in a key change from past practice, it could also include commercial premises as well. And, of course, it would include sites permitted by the new railway station policy.
Beyond setting out that initial filter between land inside, or outside, of settlement boundaries, which is crucial to the operation of the proposed new framework, we do not attempt to summarise all the changes here. Instead, we focus on key changes, including those we consider to be of particular relevance, both for central London and nationally.
Conclusion
This is the largest change to the planning system, in practice, for 15 years, and one that is unequivocally pro-development in its intentions.
In our view, it is admirably clear in its drafting, making the decision not to grant it formal legal status all the more curious.
The Government has indicated that this will be kept under review, and it will return the NPPF’s status if the proposed policies do not have the desired outcomes of supporting more effective decisions and reducing generic or alternate policies in development plans.
The split between plan-making and development management is clear, and the approach to sites inside, and outside, of settlement boundaries logical, bringing simplification to both policy-making and applications.
In the short term, we will need to see how much is changed in response to no doubt extensive consultation feedback and, beyond that, on the attitude and approach of local authorities. In practice, we have seen minimal change in attitude and practice since the Christmas 2024 incarnation of the NPPF. This will probably require further evidence of the approach of Inspectors, and the Secretary of State, to emerge from appeals, recoveries and call-ins.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of this reform will turn less on the text itself than on how confidently inspectors and the Secretary of State are prepared to apply it in the face of local resistance.
The Draft is currently out for consultation until the 10th March 2026.
To find out the key changes, including those we consider to be of particular relevance, both for central London and nationally - Read the full article here.
