Dos and don'ts of the new National Planning Policy Framework

Now that the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is nearly two months old, we have considered some practical 'dos and don'ts' which highlight key elements of what has changed, and (equally importantly) what hasn't.

If you have any queries on the new NPPF, or any elements of planning law, please do get in touch and the WBD team will be happy to assist.

1. Don't refer to superseded policy or ministerial statements! In addition to the need to immediately update references to the NPPF itself (goodbye paragraph numbers, hello policy codes), don't forget about Annex A to the NPPF which confirms a long list of additional policy documents and ministerial statements which have been incorporated into, or superseded by, the NPPF.
2. Do prioritise development within settlements if you want to benefit from the strengthened presumption in favour of sustainable development. The NPPF now confirms that development proposals in settlements should be approved unless the benefit of doing so would be substantially outweighed by any adverse effects.
3. Don't automatically dismiss any development outside of settlements though. Policy S5 provides a long list of developments outside of settlements that can still benefit from the strengthened presumption in favour of sustainable development, including, development within reasonable walking distance of well-connected train stations, development for outdoor sport and recreation, and redevelopment of previously developed land. However, for developments which are not in settlements or not in the listed acceptable developments outside of settlements, there is now a presumption for refusal ie such development should only be approved in exceptional circumstances.
4. Do consider if a Local Development Order (LDO) or Mayoral Development Order (MDO) could be used to bring forward development more efficiently. LDOs and MDOs have the ability to grant permission for multiple sites and/or for specified forms of development in what would otherwise require several separate applications. The NPPF confirms that LDOs and MDOs are 'strongly encouraged'.
5. Don't use plan making policies when making decisions, or confuse the overarching objectives of the planning system being:

• To help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy;
• To support strong, vibrant and healthy communities; and
• To support efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change
  As criteria against which individual developments should be judged.

6. Do prioritise plan making. The introduction to the NPPF confirms that 'preparing and maintaining development plans should be seen as a priority'. Plans must be kept under review with preparations for updated plans starting no later than 5 years after adoption of the current plan ^[1]. Plans should be site specific and not repeat or contradict the NPPF, and where an existing development plan policy is materially inconsistent with the new national decision-making policies, it should be given very limited weight, so up to date plans are as important as ever!
7. Don't confuse chapter summaries with policy. The wording in the text boxes at the beginning of each chapter is not a policy statement and should not be referred to, or relied on, as such.
8. Do negotiate a fair land price. The NPPF continues to confirm that the price paid nor the price intended to be paid through an option agreement should be used in viability discussions to justify a failure to comply with relevant plan policies ^[2].
9. Don't forget about the law. Despite the introduction to the NPPF stating that the NPPF is a material consideration of 'critical importance', this does not change the legislative position and statutory obligations relating to decision making. The most common being that determination must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise ^[3]. Compliance (or not) with the policies of the NPPF remains a material consideration. However, the reference to 'critical importance' should not result in any additional weight being applied when considering the planning balance.
10. Do check/consider timing for implementation of housing schemes. Policy HO13(2) confirms that for all proposals involving housing, consideration should be given as to whether a planning condition providing for an implementation timescale shorter than the statutory default (generally three years) could expedite the development.

Sources:

[1] NPPF (August 2026), Policy PM2(3)

[2] NPPF (August 2026), Policy DM5(3)

[3] Section 38 (6) Planning Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

This article was authored by Sarah Hodge, Legal Director at Womble Bond Dickinson.