National Planning Policy Framework 2026

The overall direction is towards a more standardised national approach to development management, stronger presumptions in favour of development in suitable locations and greater emphasis on housing delivery, transport accessibility and strategic growth.

Structural Change

2026 NPPF splits policy into two categories:

  • Plan-making policies
  • National decision-making policies (NDMPs)

The new NPPF specifically says that the NDMPs are ‘material considerations’ that should be read alongside the development plan. It states that plan making policies should not be used in determining development proposals

What this means:

  • Statements/appraisals more structured
  • Identify adopted development plan first then assess the proposal against the relevant NDMPs
  • Increased scrutiny of whether existing Local Plan policies remain consistent with the new national policy framework. If existing Local Plan policy is inconsistent with new NPPF, it gets ‘very limited weight’
  • Assessments should consider not only whether a proposal complies with the Local Plan, but whether relevant Local Plan policies remain consistent with the new national decision-making policies.
  • Plan-makers are told not to include policies which “duplicate, substantively restate or are inconsistent with the content of national decision-making policies”.

Presumption in Favour of Development
New approach is much more heavily influenced by where development is proposed and what need it addresses. The new S4 and S5 policies establish different approaches for development within and outside settlements.

Development within settlements – S4:

  • Strongly supportive
  • Development should generally be approved unless the benefits would be substantially outweighed by adverse effects, subject to other relevant NDMPs

Housing need & 5YHLS
Identifies categories of development which benefit from a similarly favourable balance. These include:

  • Redevelopment of previously developed land
  • Reuse of existing buildings
  • Certain development around well connected stations
  • Allocated development
  • Development which addresses an evidenced unmet need and is appropriately related to an existing settlement

Where development falls within the specified categories, permission should generally be granted unless the benefits are substantially outweighed by adverse effects.

Development around well-connected stations
Land within a “reasonable walking distance” of a qualifying station can benefit from strong policy support. This principle applies to development within settlements, outside settlements and, importantly, certain land within the Green Belt.

Defines reasonable walking distance as approximately 800 metres or around a ten-minute walk.

Associated density expectations have also been introduced. Development around relevant stations should generally achieve at least 35 dwellings per hectare, rising to 45 dwellings per hectare around stations with particularly frequent services.

Housing need & 5YHLS
Authorities are still required to identify and annually update a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five years’ housing. The established 5% and 20% buffers also remain.

However, the absence of a five-year housing land supply is now only one way of demonstrating an evidenced unmet housing need. For example, an authority may technically demonstrate a five-year supply but still have an evidenced unmet requirement for affordable housing, older persons’ accommodation or another particular housing type. Such evidence could potentially engage the favourable S5 balance.

There is also an important change to how the five-year supply requirement is calculated. Once an adopted housing requirement is more than five years old, supply is assessed against current local housing need. The previous ability to continue relying on an older requirement where policies had been reviewed and found not to require updating has been removed.

The Housing Delivery Test also remains important. Delivery below 95% triggers an action plan, below 85% triggers a 20% buffer and below 75% is treated as evidence of unmet housing need for the purposes of Policy S5.

Green Belt & Grey Belt
The Green Belt reforms introduced in the December 2024 NPPF have largely been retained and developed further.

The new Framework defines and embeds the concept within a clearer Green Belt policy structure and introduces a detailed methodology for Green Belt assessments through Annex E.

Hierarchy for potential Green Belt release continues to prioritise:
previously developed land → grey belt → other Green Belt land

Viability
New NPPF strengthens the approach to development viability.

Under Policy DM5, proposals which comply with relevant policy requirements are assumed to be viable. Application-stage viability assessments are therefore expected only in defined circumstances, including where:

  • the development is materially different from development tested at plan-making stage
  • site characteristics are materially different
  • abnormal costs exist which were not accounted for
  • there has been a significant change in site or economic circumstances

There is also greater flexibility surrounding viability and the Green Belt Golden Rules in specified circumstances, including certain strategic sites.


Follow Us

LinkedIn