The NPPF 2026 update

A rulebook, not a set of suggestions

Every NPPF since 2012 has read as narrative guidance. The 2026 version drops that. It is now around 130 coded, numbered policies: strategic policies for plan-making, and roughly 79 National Development Management Policies that apply directly to individual applications.

Decisions are still made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. National policy is one of those considerations. Numbered NDMPs are harder for a committee or an officer to reason around than a chapter of broad principles. Under Policy PM6(1)(c), local plans are told not to duplicate, restate or conflict with the NDMPs. Where a local policy does conflict, or has not caught up, it is expected to carry less weight. The same national policy then applies in Dorset as in Kent.

A government response on statutory consultees was published alongside the framework. The direction is the same: less room for process to slow a scheme, and more pressure on consultees to answer inside tighter timeframes.

Green Belt, Grey Belt and the station carve-out

The Grey Belt definition has been refined, including removal of the “footnote 7” reference that had caused confusion since December 2024. The core Green Belt principle is unchanged: boundaries should generally be altered only through the local plan, with exceptional circumstances fully evidenced (Policy GB3).

The golden rules have not gone away. Where Grey Belt land is released, a scheme still needs a higher proportion of affordable housing than a typical scheme, and a contribution toward supporting infrastructure. Nurseries and GP surgeries are named alongside open space and public realm. Those costs belong in the viability appraisal from day one.

There is a lower bar around stations. Where a council’s spatial strategy has already identified suitable land around a well-connected station, exceptional circumstances no longer need to be demonstrated separately to alter the Green Belt boundary there (Policy GB3, paragraph 4; see also GB7(h)). A site within or next to the Green Belt near a station is worth checking again if it was optioned or discounted against the 2024 framework.

Housing delivery has more teeth

Revised Housing Delivery Test results were published with the new NPPF, and the consequences of a poor result have been tightened. Government has also committed £100 million toward supporting delivery.

An authority’s HDT score still feeds the buffer on its five-year housing land supply, historically a sliding scale from 5% up to 20%. Where delivery falls far enough short, or a five-year supply cannot be shown, the tilted balance can apply: permission should be granted unless the harm significantly and demonstrably outweighs the benefits. The 2026 consequences make that threshold easier to reach in under-delivering authorities. That is a stronger hand at committee or on appeal than under the 2024 framework, and it belongs in pre-application strategy now.

The consultation also floated replacing the presumption in favour of “sustainable development” with a presumption in favour of “suitably located development.” Check the exact wording the target authority is applying before a statement relies on it.

Energy, digital infrastructure, transport and parking

A new chapter covers clean energy, utilities and digital infrastructure. It gives more weight to renewable and low-carbon generation, grid and substation infrastructure, and digital infrastructure including data centres, which barely featured in the 2024 version. Proximity to grid capacity is a stronger material consideration in site selection, not only a technical constraint.

Transport policy moves away from an emphasis on highway capacity toward place-making and sustainability. An enhanced Connectivity Tool is meant to support site selection, and transport assessments and parking standards are more flexible. Assessment requirements are tied to whether a scheme is likely to generate “significant movement,” a threshold many authorities have not yet defined. On well-connected sites, lower parking can mean more sellable or lettable area. Parking assumptions drawn up against the old standards are worth revisiting.

What applies right now

The NDMPs took effect on 17 August 2026. Plan-making is different: Annex A sets out how existing local plans should be treated. Plans already at examination before that date are generally tested against the framework in place when they were submitted, though inspectors keep discretion. Older plans that have not been reviewed against the 2026 framework stay part of the development plan, but policies that conflict with the new NDMPs should carry reduced weight.

Expect a mixed period, likely well into 2027, while each authority catches up. Further planning legislation, updated NDMPs, secondary legislation and a revised Planning Practice Guidance are still to come. The August 2026 text is the binding position today. A case with no eye on what follows has a shorter shelf life than usual.

Before the next appraisal

• Re-run sites shelved against the 2024 framework, particularly Green Belt land near stations.
• Check the target authority’s Housing Delivery Test status before committee or appeal strategy is fixed.
• Revisit parking numbers on well-connected sites.
• Check statements, viability work and appeal cases drafted before 17 August 2026 against the current wording.
• Track Annex A for each authority. Local plan status is not the same everywhere.

The eight-page briefing is the designed document. It opens on screen in this window. It is not a download. If you want DH Planning to look at a particular site or a live application, use the question form in the briefing window, or email hello@dhplanning.co.uk. A first look for new clients is free. We are a planning consultancy in Bournemouth, not architects, and we work across England.

Full planning applications · Planning appeals · Areas we cover