Why the new NPPF could have a profoundly positive impact on the living sector

Permanent presumption in favour of suitably located development

The scale of the update and changes to the 2026 NPPF are exemplified by the proposed ‘permanent presumption’ in favour of suitably located development. The government wants to be “crystal clear” about what is acceptable under a new rules‑based approach.

For example, development on urban land will be treated as a default “yes”. Proposals will only be examined further if there is evidence that the negative impacts would substantially outweigh the benefits.

The permanent presumption also allows development that addresses an evidenced unmet need, provided it is well related to an existing settlement and of an appropriate scale, or comprises major storage and distribution development.

It also supports housing and mixed-use development that is within a reasonable walking distance (800m) to railway stations. The latter will derive significant benefits for landowners with sites near to rail stations that are currently outside settlement limits.

Spatial dimension of housing delivery

There will also be a new tiered structure to seek to achieve 1.5 million homes. It is proposed that there will be spatial development strategies (SDS) at a regional level, which will then inform local plans for council areas. These will then feed into neighbourhood plans at a community level. All can form part of the development plan, on which planning decisions are based.

The geography of the new strategic planning authorities will help to address infrastructure requirements that are of regional importance. This is easier to recognise in major conurbations where leading cities come to the fore. The link between SDS and devolution should also be recognised, especially where there is mayoral leadership in place.

The SDS requires to set out a positive approach to delivering growth. This involves providing an appropriate strategy for sustainable development, considering reasonable alternatives, the 10-year infrastructure plan, the national industrial strategy and any relevant local growth plan. Local plans require to generally conform to the SDS.

Opportunities for cities and the living sector

The government sees both housing need and opportunity within cities – the drivers of economic growth. The presumption in favour of development for densification around train stations in cities and well-connected areas provides opportunity for new homes with great proximity to jobs.

This change alone may well have a profoundly positive impact on build-to-rent, co-living and student accommodation sectors. Many people prioritise proximity to transport, jobs, education and leisure, and these changes have the potential to give the sector a demand and supply boost by providing clarity for development.

The opportunity grows if the government can successfully and consistently join dots across its policy and funding areas. Combining the planning changes set out in the NPPF and the Planning and Infrastructure Act with funding commitments such as the £39bn Social and Affordable Homes Programme, National Housing Bank and infrastructure investment, alongside decentralised decision-making through devolution, is a potent mix for opportunity and revitalisation.

Places that can pull on all of these levers and commit to homes across all tenures have the best chance to reduce development risk, attract private investment and drive economic growth.

Things we will be watching throughout this process

The fundamental of development is viability. While greater clarity, and therefore lower risk and cost, is provided with the presumption in favour of development, there will always need to be an open and sensible discussion regarding other factors such as developer contributions.

The proposed NPPF suggests that developer contributions be set at the local plan-making stage rather than the application stage. While this does provide clarity of expectations of local authorities, detailed understanding around design, infrastructure requirements and development phasing that may affect viability would only become clear when proposals come forward.

If the contribution rate remains rigid and without flexibility, it may slow both plan-making and planning process which will increase risk and cost.

There is a real opportunity for the proposed changes to provide much more parity in housing tenure. The specific focuses for new development guidance provide opportunities for the living sector, but there is always a risk that these newer and less-established tenures in the UK are sidelined as officials’ muscle memory of for sale and affordable housing kicks in.

There are mentions of build-to-rent and purpose-built student accommodation in the guidance, but there is an opportunity to enhance their standing further by requiring local authorities fully assess and recognise their importance within plans and decision-making. This won’t only provide greater parity across tenures, it’ll also be a very clear signal to investors that places are actively encouraging living development.

As the UK is so far behind other countries with regards to institutional investment into the private rented sector, this signal of commitment would be welcome and a critical factor in translating policy reform into homes delivered.

Joe Sarling, head of living research, and Anthony Aitken, head of planning, Colliers