Not sure where your site stands?
Send us your project and where it is. A Senior Architect will give you an initial appraisal and guide you as to what to do next.
Start a conversationPublished on 17 August 2026, and applied to every decision from that day.
From 17 August 2026 the new NPPF applied to every decision. Inside a settlement, development should be approved unless harm substantially outweighs benefits (S4). Outside, only listed kinds qualify (S5; GB7 in the Green Belt). A housing shortfall counts only for grey belt and sites physically well-related to a settlement.
Until 17 August 2026, a housing shortfall could tip a whole decision. This appeal, allowed in October 2025, shows how the old test worked, and which new tests meet a site like it.
Nine homes, three of them affordable, on the edge of a village in the Cotswolds National Landscape. The district council refused the application in May 2024, first because the site lay outside its settlement development limits.
At appeal the council accepted a supply of 3.24 years. Its settlement policies were therefore out of date, the tilted balance applied, and the harm to the National Landscape was found slight, at the lowest end of the scale, so it gave no strong reason to refuse.
Under that test, the old paragraph 11(d) of the December 2024 Framework, permission followed unless the harm significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits. The homes, three of them affordable, carried significant weight, and the scheme was not major development in the National Landscape.
The 2026 Framework puts a site like this through different tests. Outside a settlement, policy S5 applies, and a shortfall is evidence of unmet need for a site physically well-related to an existing settlement that the infrastructure can take (S5(1)(j)). In a National Landscape, substantial weight goes on conserving and enhancing natural beauty (N4).
The decision stands. What changed on 17 August 2026 is the test the next decision on a similar site applies.
Four homes inside the Burton Green village envelope. With no five-year supply, the committee report of October 2025 applied the old presumption, and permission followed in February 2026. Under the 2026 text, a site inside a settlement goes to policy S4, which has no supply test.
Apartments and townhouses on a Northampton site allocated for employment, granted in March 2020 with no five-year supply, and without affordable housing once viability was shown. Guidance already ruled out the price paid for land as a justification; policy DM5 has since put the viability tests in the Framework.
Thirty-four affordable homes on previously developed Green Belt land in Bromsgrove district, allowed at appeal in July 2024 with a full award of costs. A district policy that left out the national exception got reduced weight; Annex A now gives very limited weight to policies materially inconsistent with national ones.
A replacement for a Green Belt bungalow near Hatton, allowed at appeal in March 2021 because it was not materially larger: about 242 square metres against 230.9, garage included. Policy GB7 now also asks that the building replaced be permanent, substantial and lawful.
Every planning application we make in our own name is a matter of public record on a council register, and ours reach more than 100 planning authorities across the UK.
Housing scheme architects →Send us your project and where it is. A Senior Architect will give you an initial appraisal and guide you as to what to do next.
→ Start a conversationEvery decision made on or after 17 August 2026 applies the new Framework, whenever the application went in. Then the location sets the test: inside a settlement, policy S4; outside one, policy S5; in the Green Belt, policies GB6 to GB8.
A settlement now has a national definition: towns, villages and built-up areas, including allocated or permitted land that will become part of them, but not hamlets (unless the plan says so) or villages washed over by the Green Belt. A site partly inside and partly outside gets both tests, part by part.
Check the council's five-year supply and its Housing Delivery Test result. The 2025 results, published on 17 August 2026, were the latest when this page was checked, and below 75%, unmet need is deemed to exist for policy S5(1)(j).
Then check the plan against the new text. A plan policy materially inconsistent with the national decision-making policies gets very limited weight, unless examined and adopted against the 2026 Framework; other policies lose no weight simply for being older.
The tilted balance went on 17 August 2026. Most housing sites take one of four common routes, each with its own way of failing; the S5 list in the questions below has the rest.
Policy S4: development within a settlement should be approved unless its benefits are substantially outweighed by the harm. The five-year supply plays no part in the test, and allocated or permitted land that will form part of the built-up area counts as part of the settlement.
Policy S5(1)(j): where there is evidenced unmet need, such as no five-year supply or a Housing Delivery Test result below 75%, homes outside a settlement can qualify if physically well-related to an existing one and the infrastructure can take them.
Development is inappropriate unless it fits a GB7 category, such as previously developed land without substantial harm to openness, grey belt where need is shown, or station land. Major housing on grey belt or station land must also meet the Golden Rules.
Reusing or replacing a building outside a settlement (S5(1)(c)) or in the Green Belt (GB7(1)(b)). The building must be of permanent and substantial construction and lawful in planning terms (lawful is new in the Green Belt), and a replacement must be for the same use.
Until 17 August 2026, without a five-year supply the most important policies counted as out of date, and permission followed unless protected-area policies gave a strong reason to refuse, or harm significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits. Oakridge Lynch was allowed that way in October 2025.
From 17 August 2026 the location sets the test first. Inside a settlement the supply no longer matters to the principle (S4). Outside one, a shortfall opens a single route, for sites physically well-related to an existing settlement (S5(1)(j)); in the Green Belt the text names it only in the grey belt test (GB7).
The weighing changed too. Homes that meet evidenced need get substantial weight (HO7), and the old phrases great weight, significant weight and less than substantial harm are not in the new text.
Decisions made under an earlier Framework stand; only the test for the next decision changed.
The National Planning Policy Framework published on 17 August 2026, replacing the December 2024 version.
It sets the government's planning policy for plans and decisions in England. It has 20 chapters and six annexes. Its 131 policies carry codes such as S4, HO7 and GB8 in place of numbered paragraphs. Each thematic chapter separates plan-making policies from national decision-making policies. The plan-making policies are not used to decide applications. The development plan still comes first in law, with the Framework a material consideration read alongside it.
Yes. Its decision-making policies applied to every decision from 17 August 2026, whenever the application was made. There was no transitional period for applications.
Most of Annex A's transitional rules are for plan-making. For decisions, a plan policy materially inconsistent with the national decision-making policies gets very limited weight, unless it was examined and adopted, or made, against the 2026 Framework. Other plan policies lose no weight for being older (Annex A).
Policies S3 to S5. Inside a settlement, development should be approved unless its benefits are substantially outweighed (S4).
Outside a settlement, only listed kinds of development qualify (S5; GB7 in the Green Belt). The old test, permission unless the harm significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, is not in the new text. The S5 list covers reusing or replacing lawful, permanent buildings, previously developed land, limited infilling within groups of houses, exception sites, land near well-connected stations, allocated land and evidenced unmet need. Anything else outside a settlement needs exceptional circumstances. Isolated homes are decided under policy HO11, the old paragraph 84, explained in the guide to policy HO11.
Yes, but in fewer places. A shortfall counts as evidenced unmet need for homes outside but physically well-related to a settlement (S5(1)(j)).
It also counts towards grey belt in the Green Belt. Inside a settlement it no longer affects the principle. The buffer is 5%, or 20% after significant under-delivery or, for decisions, where a requirement adopted in the last five years under an older Framework is 80% or less of local housing need. Where a plan adopted in the last five years shows a five-year supply and a Housing Delivery Test result above 75%, a higher standard-method figure is not evidence of unmet need under S5(1)(j) for five years from adoption (Annex A).
An annual measure of the homes delivered in an area against the homes required over three years.
Below 95% a council needs an action plan. Below 85% a 20% buffer applies. Below 75%, unmet need is deemed to exist. A result below 75% used to switch on the presumption in favour of sustainable development. From 17 August 2026 it opens policy S5(1)(j) and the grey belt need test instead. The 2025 results were published on 17 August 2026 and replaced the 2024 results for decisions. Each year's consequences apply from the day after publication.
Substantial weight now goes to complying with the Golden Rules, in place since December 2024, for major housing on Green Belt land (GB8).
Until the plan sets its own figure, the Rules mean affordable housing 15 percentage points above the highest existing requirement, capped at 50% (50% where there is none), plus infrastructure and public green space. A viability case is allowed in three circumstances only (GB8). Reusing or replacing a Green Belt building needs one lawful in planning terms and of permanent and substantial construction (GB7). Schemes on land released by plans adopted before 12 December 2024, or granted before then, are exempt. See the guide to building on Green Belt land.
Consultation ran from 16 December 2025 to 10 March 2026. The government response was published with the new Framework on 17 August 2026.
The consultation drew 20,572 responses, including campaign responses. The housing minister wrote to councils that day. A written ministerial statement followed on 1 September 2026. The 2024 and 2025 Housing Delivery Test results were published at the same time. The government said it would publish national model conditions and consult on a standard section 106 template for medium sites. Planning practice guidance was not rewritten on 17 August 2026; a wider update was promised.
Not to decisions made on or after 17 August 2026. It still governs neighbourhood plans submitted on or before that date.
It also still governs most plans prepared outside the new plan-making system. Decisions already made under it stand. Some planning practice guidance still described the December 2024 Framework after 17 August 2026, including the housing supply guidance's reference to the old presumption. Where the two differ, the August 2026 Framework is the later text and calls the guidance supporting, so the date of the guidance is worth noting.
Each rule here comes from the sources below.
Rickett Architects
A RIBA Chartered practice, working since 1970, with more than 2,500 projects behind it. Our senior architects take projects from first survey through planning to completion, for private clients, developers and landowners across the Midlands and well beyond it.
Tell us about your project
A Senior Architect will reply. We will give you an initial appraisal and guide you as to what to do next.