Written by Nikki O’Hagan, 5th August 2024

Prior to the General Election, Labour promised to publish a new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) within their first 100 days in government. It looks like they are working hard to follow through on that promise:

Public consultation on Labour’s proposed changes to the NPPF opened on 30th July 2024.

Read on to find out more.

What is the NPPF?

The NPPF contains the government’s planning policies for England. It also explains how these policies should be applied. Its policies cover all the main planning issues, such as:

• Housing delivery
• Economic development
• Community facilities
• Transport
• Design quality
• Green Belt
• Natural environment
• Historic environment
• Flood risk.

The NPPF is relevant to all planning applications in England. Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) are also obliged to take the NPPF into account when they prepare their Local Plans. All Local Plans and local policies are supposed to be consistent with the NPPF. Put simply, this means Local Plans and local policies generally cannot:

• Be in conflict with NPPF policy
• Set requirements that are stricter or materially different to NPPF requirements.

The NPPF provides the national umbrella under which all Local Plans and local policies sit. As a result, changes to the NPPF have a national impact.

How does the public consultation work?

Public consultation on Labour’s proposed changes to the NPPF opened on Tuesday 30th July 2024 and will close on Tuesday 24th September 2024. Anyone can respond to the consultation to make their views known to the government.

The easiest way to make your views known is by responding to the online survey. Click the button below to go to the online survey.

You can also send your comments in an email to PlanningPolicyConsultation@communities.gov.uk or by post to:

Planning Policy Consultation Team
Planning Directorate – Planning Policy Division
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Floor 3, Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

Will my comments make any difference?

As with most public consultations, the more comments the government receives about a specific issue, the more likely they are to take them into account. So yes, your comments really could make a difference! If you feel strongly about any of the government’s proposed changes to the NPPF, you should make your views known.

What proposed changes to the NPPF are on the table?

The government is proposing to make a number of important and far-reaching changes to the NPPF. Some of the proposed reforms are quite technical so we’ve done our best to summarise the most significant changes in plain English here.

Grey belt and Green Belt

Green Belts are designated parcels of land in England located around large urban ureas, including London, Birmingham, Manchester and Newcastle. Click the button below to access CPRE’s Green Belt map:

Green Belts serve important strategic purposes but Green Belt designation is not a marker of environmental importance. This means land in Green Belts – unlike land in AONBs or National Parks, for example – is not necessarily “green”, scenic or natural. Instead, Green Belts are specifically designated in order to:

1. Prevent the unrestricted sprawl of large urban areas.
2. Prevent towns from merging into each other.
3. Safeguard the countryside from urban encroachment.
4. Preserve the setting and special character of historic towns.
5. Encourage the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

These are the “five purposes” of the Green Belt.

Development in Green Belts is seriously restricted by both the NPPF and by relevant Local Plans. This has been the case ever since the first Green Belt was designated in the 20th Century.

Labour’s proposed changes to the NPPF would alter longstanding Green Belt constraints in significant ways.

What’s changing?

Firstly, Labour proposes to introduce a new “grey belt” definition to the NPPF. The “grey belt” would be defined as land within Green Belts that makes “a limited contribution to the five Green Belt purposes”. The definition would specifically exclude certain sites of primary environmental importance, such as AONBs, Local Green Spaces and National Parks.

Secondly, Labour proposes a new requirement to compel Local Planning Authorities to review their Green Belt boundaries if they are unable to meet their identified housing, commercial and other needs without altering Green Belt boundaries. Local Planning Authorities would have to follow a sequential approach to the release of land from the Green Belt. This would require them to prioritise the release of the following types of sites in this order:

1. Brownfield land
2. Other grey belt land
3. Higher performing, “sustainable” land.

Thirdly, Labour proposes a new Green Belt policy that would only apply where a Local Planning Authority is failing to meet its 5-year housing target (or is delivering less than 75% against the Housing Delivery Test) or there is unmet commercial or other need. In these circumstances, the new policy would provide that:

Development on the Green Belt will not be considered inappropriate when it is on sustainable “grey belt” land, where golden rules for major development are satisfied, and where development would not fundamentally undermine the function of the Green Belt across the area of the Local Plan as a whole.

In addition, Labour would introduce the following requirements for major residential developments on land released from the Green Belt:

• At least 50% affordable housing
• Necessary infrastructure improvements, like GP surgeries, schools, roads etc.
• New or improved local green spaces (parks etc.)

What is this likely to mean in practice?

Green Belts are likely to decrease in size and more development is likely to take place in Green Belts, especially for new housing. Individual planning applications for the development of “grey belt” land are more likely to be approved.

Brownfield land: presumption in favour of development

Amongst the most significant changes proposed to the NPPF is the introduction of a new presumption in favour of development on brownfield land.

Brownfield land – A.K.A previously developed land – is land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure such as a building or hardstanding. It includes a wide range of both active and abandoned land, including retail, industrial, residential, commercial, educational and equestrian sites. However, there are a number of exclusions, such as:

• agricultural/forestry land.
• land where the remains of the permanent structure have blended into the landscape (effectively disappeared).
• open/green land in built-up areas, such as domestic gardens, parks and allotments.

Where its previous use has been abandoned, brownfield land often detracts from the character and quality of a local area. Their buildings are frequently derelict and unsightly and the rest of the plot might be similarly overgrown and unkempt. These sites are also a common target for antisocial behaviour.

What’s changing?

At present, the NPPF encourages Local Planning Authorities to support the re-use and re-development of brownfield land in their Local Plans. How and to what extent this is achieved, however, is left to the discretion of each Local Planning Authority. In practice, very few Local Plans contain policies that support the re-use of brownfield land as a general rule. At best, you can expect to see specific brownfield sites allocated for specific types of development. This means that proposals to redevelop brownfield sites are typically assessed in the same way as proposals to redevelop greenfield (i.e. previously undeveloped) sites.

This is all set to change. Labour’ proposed changes to the NPPF would establish new, “in principle” support for the re-development of all brownfield sites. In the government’s own words, this will mean that “the default answer to brownfield development should be yes”.

What is this likely to mean in practice?

Unless there is a very good reason to say no, proposals to re-develop brownfield land for housing or other uses should be permitted in all areas. This will apply as much to rural areas and land outside of settlement boundaries as to urban areas.

If you have had permission refused for the development of brownfield land in the recent or more distant past, you should seriously consider making a new application once the revised NPPF is published.

Housing need and supply: various

Altogether, the government is proposing significant changes to the ways in which housing need and supply is calculated, monitored and, in the case of a housing deficit, addressed. Together, these changes should:

• Increase the minimum number of houses – the local housing need/target – Local Planning Authorities are expected to deliver.
• More strongly compel Local Planning Authorities to meet or exceed their local housing need.
• Strengthen the penalties for Local Planning Authorities that fail to meet their local housing need, especially where that failure is sustained over multiple years.
• Ensure appropriate mechanisms are in place to increase housing supply wherever there is a deficit.

Increasing housing density

At present, the NPPF expects local planning policies to support a “significant uplift” in the density of residential development (density means the number of houses per hectare) in sustainable urban areas wherever there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land available for housing. Shortages of land available for housing are likely to occur in the following circumstances:

• The local area is already quite densely built up, meaning there is not much land left to build on
• Land within the local area is protected or development is constrained because of natural beauty or natural features. This could include, for example, land designated as a National Park or AONB. It could also include land separated by rivers or other waterways that make access difficult
• Available land is already serving other, important uses such as for agriculture or industry
• There are other land-based constraints on development, such as Green Belt designation.

However, there is quite a significant exception to this rule that functions as a bit of a “get out of jail free card” for Local Planning Authorities. The exception is that significant increases in residential density are not required where this would be “wholly out of character with the existing area”. Of course, this is open to the Local Planning Authority’s interpretation and any “significant uplift” in density will change the character of an area to some extent.

The current Labour government proposes to remove this exception from the NPPF. The government also intends to strengthen the expectation that Local Plans should promote increased housing densities in urban areas, even where there is no existing or anticipated land shortage.

What is this likely to mean in practice?

Housing density in England’s sustainable urban areas, including town and city centres, is likely to increase significantly over the course of the current government. This should also increase the national housing stock and cause house prices to reduce.

Urban housing growth is also likely to increase pressure on already strained urban services and infrastructure like roads, schools, shops and hospitals. So the success of this strategy is likely to depend on the appropriate delivery of new and enhanced infrastructure and community services in all the right places.

Standard method for assessing local housing need

The government introduced a “standard method” for assessing local housing need a number of years ago. The standard method is a mathematical calculation that takes account of 2014 household growth projections as well as a few other factors. The method is used to calculate how many houses a local area needs to build over a specified period in order to meet its minimum housing needs. Local planning authorities are required to deliver enough houses to meet this need. In most cases, the standard method generates a larger housing need than other, alternative methods.

In 2023, the Conservative government made changes to the NPPF which relaxed the requirement to use the standard method. They introduced more exceptional circumstances which enabled more Local Planning Authorities to use alternative methods to calculate their housing need. This generally resulted in smaller housing targets than would have been generated by the standard method.

The Labour government now proposes to reverse these 2023 changes which would mean the standard method would need to be used in all but the most exceptional of circumstances. This would not be a brand new addition to the NPPF. Rather, it would revert the NPPF to its pre-2023 state.

The government is also proposing separate changes to the way the standard method is calculated. Most significantly, the reliance on 2014 household growth projections would be abandoned. Instead, housing need would be based on a set percentage – 0.8% – of an area’s existing housing stock. This would mean local housing growth would occur in proportion to what already exists. The government also intends to strengthen the existing adjustment for affordability. This means housing targets would be increased in areas where house prices are especially high, causing house prices to gradually reduce as the local supply of houses increases.

What is this likely to mean in practice?

In short, these proposed changes to the NPPF are likely to give rise to increased housing targets throughout most of England. This means Local Planning Authorities will also need to increase their local housing supply. This could require them to relax or adjust their local planning policies to allow more houses to be built in more areas.

The changes may also make it more difficult for certain Local Planning Authorities to meet their local housing target. When a Local Planning Authority fails to meet its housing target, applications for new houses are more likely to be given planning permission even if they conflict with local housing policies. This could include, for example, granting planning permission for houses in rural areas and outside of settlement boundaries.

Presumption in favour of sustainable development

The presumption in favour of sustainable development is a longstanding feature of the NPPF. In short, the presumption works something like this:

If a Local Planning Authority fails to meet its local housing need OR its “most important” local policies are out-of-date or non-existent, then the presumption in favour of sustainable development is engaged. When the presumption is engaged, applications for new houses are far more likely to be approved even if they conflict with national or local policies. In particular, planning permission for new houses can only be refused where:

• it would conflict with NPPF policies that protect “areas or assets of particular importance”. This includes National Parks, AONBs and the Green Belt; or
• when assessed against all NPPF policies, it is found that the adverse impacts of granting permission would “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits.

In 2023, the Conservative government relaxed the rules on meeting local housing need. This meant that the presumption was no longer always engaged whenever Local Planning Authorities failed to meet their housing need. This naturally reduced the number of houses being permitted and delivered throughout England. It also reduced the pressure on Local Planning Authorities to meet their housing targets, resulting in local housing deficits.

What’s changing?

The current Labour government proposes to make the following changes to the presumption in favour of sustainable development:

• Firstly, changes proposed to other NPPF policies are likely to significantly increase the number of Local Planning Authorities that fail to meet their local housing needs. So the presumption in favour of sustainable development will be engaged in more areas, making it easier to gain consent for new houses even if there is conflict with national or local policies
• Secondly, much needed clarity will be provided on the meaning of “most important”. Until now, this phrase has been the topic of extensive debate both at application stage, upon appeal and in the Courts. The government intends to make it clear that the “most important” policies are policies concerned with the supply of land. In plain English, that basically means policies that set out where and how the Local Planning Authority intends to meet or exceed its local housing need
• Thirdly, the government will introduce a new requirement to “consider” local policies concerned with the location and design of development whenever the presumption is engaged. The expectation is that this will prevent unacceptably low quality and unsustainable development from taking place
• Finally, the government intends to reverse the changes made by the Conservative government in 2023. This would ensure the presumption is engaged – and more houses are delivered – in areas where the Local Planning Authority has failed to meet its 5-year housing target. This is how the presumption worked prior to 2023.

What is this likely to mean in practice?

The presumption in favour of sustainable development is likely to be engaged more frequently and in more local areas. This should result in more planning permissions being granted for more houses, including for housing applications that would have been refused if the presumption had not been engaged.

However, the new requirement to “consider” local design and locational policies may significantly reduce the effectiveness of the presumption. Until now, the presumption has enabled housing to be approved in locations where the Local Planning Authority would otherwise refuse permission, including on sites located outside of settlement boundaries and in rural areas. Labour’s proposed changes could make this more difficult.

Affordable housing

In short, the Labour government has proposed the following changes to the NPPF:

• Introduce a new requirement to compel Local Planning Authorities to consider the need for Socially Rented housing (“council homes”) and plan to meet this need.
• Bring an end to the current priority given to “affordable” homes for ownership, which include “Starter Homes”. Give priority instead to affordable rented homes, including privately rented and social (council) houses.
• Promote the delivery of mixed tenure developments. These are sites that include a mix of rented homes, owner-occupied homes, affordable homes and specialist housing like older people’s homes, self-build homes and student accommodation.
• Support the delivery of predominantly or exclusively affordable housing developments.

Design of development

Labour proposes to remove all the references to “beauty” and “beautiful” design that were added to the 2023 version of the NPPF by the Conservative government. The current government considers this term to be highly subjective, leading to inconsistencies in how it is interpreted and applied.

Labour also intends to make it clear that the National Model Design Code – and any local design guides and codes, where in place – should be the primary document(s) against which design is assessed.

Upwards extensions

In 2023, the NPPF was revised to introduce new support for the upwards (roof) extension of existing buildings to deliver new homes. However, the policy only applies to buildings with mansard roofs. Labour proposes to remove the mansard roof restriction so that this policy would apply to all roof types.

Community needs and infrastructure

Labour proposes that “significant weight” is given in the assessment of planning applications to the importance of delivering new or improved public service infrastructure. Labour also proposes that the existing requirement for Local Planning Authorities to meet the educational needs of residents includes specific reference to:

• Post-16 educational facilities
• Childcare facilities (early year places).

Although no specific proposals have been put forward, the government is also seeking views on how the NPPF can better promote healthy communities and tackle childhood obesity. This may include strengthening the current controls on hot food takeaways near schools.

Onshore wind

The government has already confirmed that footnotes 57 and 58 of the NPPF – which place significant constraints on onshore wind projects – no longer apply. They now propose that onshore wind projects are re-integrated into the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime.

In short, the NSIP regime streamlines the planning process for applicable projects, making it quicker and easier to gain consent. Instead of making an application to the Local Planning Authority, developers apply directly to the Planning Inspectorate which is a body of central government. The final decision is made by the relevant Secretary of State. The whole process can take around 18 months.

Renewable energy

Labour proposes to strengthen the NPPF’s support for renewable energy projects. Proposed changes include:

• New requirement for Local Planning Authorities to give “significant weight” to the benefits of renewable and low carbon energy generation.
• New requirement for Local Planning Authorities to give “significant weight” to the contribution made by a development proposal to a net zero future.
• Strengthen the expectation that Local Planning Authorities proactively identify sites for renewable and low carbon energy projects.
• Enable renewable energy schemes to take place in sensitive areas, including valuable habitats.

The government has also invited comments on how else national policy could be amended to better tackle climate change.

Application fee increases

Planning application fees are currently set nationally and typically increase on a yearly basis. In December 2023, there was a significant fee increase of 35% for major applications and 25% for all other applications. In spite of this, the Labour government estimates that there is a significant funding shortfall of some £262 million across England’s Local Planning Authorities. This affects their ability to perform effectively and issue good-quality, timely decisions.

The Labour government proposes significant increases in planning application fees. The fee for householder applications is proposed to increase from £258 to £528. The government is also seeking views on potential increases to fees associated with other planning applications, including applications for which there is currently no charge. That includes Listed Building Consent applications and applications for works to protected (TPO) trees.

The government is also seeking views on a range of proposals that would allow Local Planning Authorities to set their own application fees.

Our concerns

The intention behind the proposed application fee increases is to improve the service delivered by Local Planning Authorities. This would be a welcome change. Planning Direct has serious concerns, however, about the lack of any proposed mechanisms to ensure that:

1. Increased funding is properly allocated by Local Planning Authorities to improve their service in a meaningful and measurable way. For example, by hiring more planning officers.
2. The service offered by Local Planning Authorities is rigorously monitored to ensure increased funding gives rise to meaningful and measurable improvements.
3. Penalties are in place to ensure that any Local Planning Authorities that fail to improve their service are held to account and the failure is promptly remedied.

Whilst we acknowledge that increases in planning fees are unavoidable to some extent, Planning Direct has noticed a worrisome trend in recent years – as planning fees have increased, the service offered by Local Planning Authorities has only gotten worse. This is borne out, for example, by:

• A total lack of engagement. In some local areas, planning officers refuse to communicate with applicants at any point over the course of their application. Often, the first communication they receive is the decision notice.
• Late decisions. Unfortunately, decisions are now more likely to be issued after the statutory deadline than before it. Applications are taking months and even years to be decided when it should be weeks.
• Hasty and poorly justified decisions. Although this is open to interpretation, we have noticed a marked decline in the overall quality of Local Planning Authorities’ decisions.

It is important that this trend is halted, especially in light of the very substantial increases proposed to planning application fees. It is essential that any such increases are accompanied by similarly substantial improvements in service. Labour’s proposals do not currently do enough to secure this.

What’s next?

The current consultation on Labour’s proposed changes to the NPPF is open until Tuesday 24th September 2024. Once it closes, we expect the government to take all consultation responses into careful consideration. Depending on the content, extent and number of objections to their proposals, the government may:

• Carry out another round of public consultation, potentially focused on certain issues only.
• Put forward new or amended proposals, especially in respect of those proposals that are currently open-ended. These may then be subject to further consultation.
• Make their changes to the NPPF and publish it. Once published, the revised NPPF will have weight in all planning decisions.

How can Planning Direct assist me?

Labour’s proposed changes to the NPPF will throw open the doors to development. We expect to see significant increases in both the number of planning applications made and the number of planning applications approved. This will particularly be the case for:

• The Green Belt.
• Areas with serious constraints on development, whether as a result of overly strict local policies, land availability or natural constraints (like waterways that cut off access to land).
• Areas that struggle – either currently or historically – to meet their minimum housing target.
• Brownfield land.
• Areas without an up-to-date (or effective!) Local Plan.

If you own a site with increased development potential, we can assist you to prepare and submit a successful planning application. Click the button below to find out more about making a planning application.

If you feel strongly about any of the proposed changes to the NPPF, Planning Direct can also assist you to prepare an effective and cohesive written response to the ongoing public consultation. We have previously prepared comprehensive planning objection letters on behalf of a wide range of interested parties, including Parish Councils, Neighbourhood Groups, National Retailers and individual business owners and homeowners. Click the button below to find out more about Planning Direct’s objection letter service.

Talk to us about your development site or objection needs today. Our initial advice is always free of charge.