Revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

December 12, 2024 PR Officer

Ian Barnett, National Land Director, Leaders Romans Group (LRG)

What a difference a year makes.  The NPPF changes announced today provide and new framework for the industry to work to and a flurry of activity on LinkedIn as everyone seeks to understand the key points and how they will affect their projects. 

The key points are:

  • 370,000 houses per year (that is 1.5 houses per square km per year)
  • Local authorities to be accountable and old Local Plans to have a 6 year housing land supply.  It doesn’t have the same ring as 5 year housing land supply but is much better than the old 3 year housing land supply!
  • The grey belt is here and has been defined.  It’s basically Green Belt that doesn’t conform to the Green Belt purposes and with a new colour. Now it just needs to be tested…. Who’s going first?
  • Viability – the blanket 50% affordable housing requirement on Grey Belt has been removed which is sensible
  • Politics – I have been calling for the removal of politics from planning decisions for sites which have the benefit of an outline or an allocation for years. Although there was no specific reference to ‘deemed consent’ in the NPPF, it’s encouraging that this is one of the main issues being considered in the recently published Planning Working Paper on Planning Committees.

There have been many grand announcements in my time in planning and development.  The priority has always been to build enough houses for the country’s population in the right places in a manner that protects the most valuable landscapes and environmentally sensitive areas. 

So are the latest announcements in any different to what we’ve all heard before?  On paper – yes absolutely.  The conviction and tone as well as the content (and indeed the fact it’s announced ahead of when most people expected!) does suggest that this time at least the Government is serious. 

The new NPPF gives an opportunity for the whole narrative on development and housing delivery to change.  Whilst some would like to have seen more in terms of strategic planning, today’s NPPF at least gives a new window of opportunity for many sites that are suitable for development and which have been held up by inefficiencies and lack of resources, meddling local politics and NIMBYism to come forward.  

Delivering 1.5m houses in the first term is ambitious and unrealistic but it was utterly impossible under the previous planning system.  The time for delivery is here and it’s the responsibility of everyone in the industry – developers, landowners, planners and local authorities to do what is needed.  The framework is there – but it will take time to bed in and what we need now more than anything after a new NPPF update for the last two Christmases is stability so we can get on with the task ahead.