Mark Furlonger, senior director at Ramboll, provides his perspective on the Government’s proposed overhaul of the National Planning Policy Framework, examining how the changes aim to reduce delay, increase certainty and reshape the planning system
The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England, providing guidance on both plan-making and decision-taking. Unlike previous updates, this is a revamp and rewrite of the NPPF, signalling the Government’s focus on reducing planning delays and increasing certainty.
New National Decision-Making Policies
The draft introduces a new structure, setting out individual plan-making and decision-making policies – which are not to be muddled. New National Decision-Making Policies (NDMPs) move a significant amount of development management policy from local plans into the NPPF.
In effect, this should provide more ‘rules’ for determining planning applications, thereby increasing the likelihood that all decisions are derived from a common cause.
So, the way in which NDMPs are applied is important – they are not to be duplicated within Local Plans (a welcome confirmation that a local authority need not repeat other policy) and where local plan policies are inconsistent with NDMPs, they will be given limited weight. The NDMPs will also need to be read as a whole. While the idea that policy should be properly applied is not new, explicitly, they should be read with their footnotes and new annexes. The NPPF also deals with the weight to be assigned to some policies and when permission should be refused. Arguably, this is as clear an indication that we have seen of how national policy would be applied.
Big-picture growth plans introduced
Strategic planning isn’t new, but the draft NPPF also (re)introduces Spatial Development Strategies (SDSs) more widely as a strategic tier of planning policy, which will set out a long-term (minimum 20-year) vision for growth at a sub-regional scale. SDSs are to be produced by Strategic Planning Authorities and sit above Local Plans in the planning policy hierarchy, setting the broad direction for growth and infrastructure.
If adopted, and in many cases this is unlikely to be quick, the debates traditionally resolved at Local Plan level, particularly around housing numbers, will move to the strategic tier – with Local Plans having to fall in line.
Local plans have a simpler role
Local Plans will have a more focused and simplified role. Their primary purpose will be to identify where development should go, rather than to outline strategic growth aims or duplicate national decision-making requirements.
Albeit another attempt to streamline plan-making, which has never really settled down in the planning system over many years, this does feel like one of the simpler approaches and perhaps a better structured means of plan-making.
Stronger support for development
The draft also expands the presumption in favour of sustainable development, applying it more widely than before. Greater support and an “in principle” acceptance are given to development on brownfield land, land within settlements, and sites near railway stations.
Outside settlements, the presumption would apply to a list of development types, including those to meet unmet housing needs. This might mean proposals that align with these priorities could move through the planning process more quickly, while sites in less strategically supported locations may face greater scrutiny. Overall, though, the changes are quite refreshing and intended to reduce uncertainty and risk, making it clearer where development is likely to gain planning permission.
Development near stations
The draft introduces minimum density thresholds for residential development near railway stations – 40 dwellings per hectare, rising to 50 dwellings per hectare – and is contingent on accessibility levels.
It also makes clear that proposals which do not make efficient use of land in line with these expectations should be refused: a clear signal that, subject to accessibility, high-density development around transport hubs is to be welcomed.
Support for ‘medium-sized’ residential schemes
A new category of “medium development” is introduced, covering schemes of 10–49 dwellings or sites up to 2.5 hectares. Flexibility around affordable housing delivery and application information requirements is expected for this category of development, benefiting SME builders and increasing housing delivery on such sites.
Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) exemptions expanded
The good news on BNG is perhaps that, alongside the draft NPPF, the Government has announced measures to reduce regulatory burdens on smaller developments. Sites of up to 0.2 hectares are expected to be exempt from mandatory BNG, and requirements will be simplified for other small and medium sites. Defra has also confirmed it will consult on potential exemptions for brownfield housing sites up to 2.5 hectares.
As ever, the practical effect of change will depend on the detailed rules that emerge from consultation. Though BNG is reaffirmed in the draft NPPF, this should reduce the burden on schemes that are less able to deliver.
Transitional planning arrangements
Finally, it is also worth noting that though change may be welcomed, the new NPPF will only apply to planning decisions once it is formally published, which is likely to be in April. Until then, the current framework remains in force.
And, for plan making, it will apply to the new-style local plans, but local plans already in preparation will continue to be tested against the current NPPF – though, when published, the 2026 NPPF should be the go-to for decision making.
