Read more about: Latest news, Local government, Planning, Real Estate, Planning and Regeneration,
20 August 2026
With the NPPF 2026 now in force, the planning rulebook has shifted decisively. Rebecca Stewart takes a first look at what some of the changes mean for LPAs and developers.
On 17 August, the Government published its much-anticipated new National Planning Policy Framework (“NPPF 2026”), introducing a suite of changes to national planning policy. Through directive, codified policies, the NPPF 2026 aims to strengthen support for appropriate development, set new parameters for that development and streamline the processes needed to bring it forward as quickly as possible.
The NPPF 2026 must be taken into account by local planning authorities (“LPAs”) in decision-making immediately, so it is important that LPAs get to grips with its contents as quickly as possible. Developers, meanwhile, will understandably be keen to explore the opportunities the new framework presents for prospective applications.
As our planning team digests the full document, widely regarded as a seismic update to the planning system, these are some of the headline observations that merit particular attention:
The presumption in favour of sustainable development (previously contained in paragraph 11, which included the ‘tilted balance’ test) has been reworked and now has a much wider reach. Policy S3 makes clear that the operation of the presumption will depend on whether a development is located inside or outside a settlement (e.g. cities, towns and (some) villages).
For developments within a settlement, permission “should be granted unless the benefits of doing so would be substantially outweighed by any adverse effects” when assessed against the NPPF policies (policy S4).
For developments outside settlements, only certain forms of development are supported (policy S5). These are listed, and include types of development already familiar in rural locations, such as agricultural development, certain house extensions and alterations, telecommunications infrastructure (which is more generally supported throughout the NPPF 2026), and gypsy pitches in some circumstances. Developments that address evidenced unmet need (i.e. poor housing land supply and poor housing delivery) are also supported where certain criteria are met. Where a development falls within the list in policy S5, the same ‘substantially outweighed’ test applies. Where an out-of-settlement development does not fall within one of those categories, it should only be approved in exceptional circumstances.
The NPPF 2026 directs, in all locations, that where a proposal accords with an up-to-date development plan and NPPF 2026 policies, permission should be granted without delay.
Implications for our clients
The new presumption in favour of sustainable development should encourage more positive planning decisions, particularly within settlements, and help speed up delivery. The clarity provided on appropriate development outside settlements should also lead to more consents for the listed categories of development.
That said, LPA decision-making should continue to follow the established legal framework: a planning application should be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise (section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). The NPPF 2026 remains a key material consideration, including the new presumption, alongside other material considerations such as decision-making policies that identify circumstances for refusal or specify harms or benefits to be weighed by the decision-maker.
It is also worth noting Annex A of the NPPF 2026, which forms part of national planning policy, states that, to the extent development plan policies are materially inconsistent with the NPPF 2026, they should be given very limited weight unless they have been examined and adopted, or made, against the NPPF 2026. Decision-makers will need to demonstrate due regard to this when evaluating planning applications where policy conflicts arise. Separately, LPAs may consider whether a new plan, prepared against the NPPF 2026, is needed where current local policies clearly conflict with the new framework, in order to streamline decision-making.
The NPPF 2026 opens a gateway for more development around transport stations, including in Green Belt areas. It retains the existing principle that established Green Belt designations should only be altered through the local plan process and where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified (policy GB3). However, the NPPF 2026 provides that “Where a development plan’s spatial strategy has identified suitable land around well-connected stations for development, exceptional circumstances do not need to be demonstrated to justify altering Green Belt boundaries” (policy GB3, paragraph 4).
This policy change is significant, enabling LPAs to amend Green Belt boundaries more easily to support new development.
The NPPF 2026 also stipulates minimum density requirements for new development around well-connected stations: 35–45 dwellings per hectare, depending on service frequency to the relevant stations. This is subject to limited exceptions, including for non-major development where it is demonstrated that the standards are inappropriate or unachievable (policy L3, paragraph 2(c)).
Implications for our clients
The new support for releasing Green Belt land around transport interchanges, combined with the drive to maximise the use of space in these locations, will create major opportunities for big-build developers and enable LPAs to expand housing delivery at well-connected sites. However, to benefit from this opportunity and for development to avoid the ‘exceptional circumstances’ requirement, LPAs will need to plan ahead by identifying acceptable locations and parameters for such development through their local development plans.
Alongside creating greater opportunities for large-scale development further afield, the NPPF 2026 also strongly supports increased density within already developed areas. The previous iteration of the NPPF supported development that made ‘efficient use’ of land; the NPPF 2026 now directs that “substantial weight” should be given to the benefits of a scheme where it creates additional homes or floorspace within settlements by using airspace above existing residential and commercial premises, or through additional development within existing plots. The NPPF 2026 is clear that “proposals that do not make efficient use of land in accordance with paragraph 2 of this policy should be refused” (policy L3).
Implications for our clients
LPAs will need to show that they have given proper (substantial) weight to the benefits of development that maximises space on existing sites, when balancing those benefits against other relevant material considerations, including amenity impacts. Amenity impacts from such development are likely to arise and will not be automatically overridden by infill or similar proposals. However, where there are limited other factors weighing against approval, those impacts are likely to need to be considerable to justify refusal.
The NPPF 2026 also provides a clearer and more prescriptive set of requirements for local plans with plans expected to cover a period of no less than 10 years from the point of adoption, down from 15 years (policy PM2). The preparation of local plans must be accompanied by a Green Belt assessment and an identification of grey belt land, with that assessment informing decisions on whether Green Belt boundaries should be altered to accommodate development needs.
Implications for our clients
This shorter local plan period should help LPAs prepare new local plan documents more quickly, which will be welcomed by authorities seeking to adopt a plan based on the NPPF 2026 and reconcile policy conflicts. It will also enable authorities to adapt to changing local circumstances and adopt policies based on up-to-date evidence, although there is an obvious tension with the need for long-term stability for housing and infrastructure. Meanwhile, assessing the contribution that different areas of Green Belt make to its purposes, through a Green Belt assessment, should help identify areas that can be categorised as grey belt/released for development to meet housing need.
The above is just a brief look at some of the important new and updated policies arising from the NPPF 2026, which alone demonstrate the significant impact the framework is likely to have on decision-making and policy creation at a local level. Our planning team will continue to examine the detail of the NPPF 2026 and other policy changes in the coming weeks.
Sharpe Pritchard’s planning team has extensive experience advising LPAs on national policy and supporting LPAs through the local development plan process. Please contact a member of our planning team if you require advice or assistance in relation to these matters.
This article is for general awareness only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this page was first published.
