A Changed Planning Position Can Justify a Fresh Look at Value
The National Planning Policy Framework published on 17 August 2026 comprehensively reorganised England’s national planning policies. It now separates the policies used to prepare development plans from those used to decide applications, with the new decision-making policies taking effect on publication.
For a landowner, the practical question is whether those changes make a particular use of the land more achievable. A suitable housing scheme, redevelopment or mixed-use proposal may now have a policy argument that deserves investigation. That can change the options worth considering before a sale, a planning application or a longer-term promotion strategy.
This guide connects the main site opportunities with the questions behind a land assessment: what might be supported, how much development the site could accommodate, and what delivering that scheme would involve. For a wider comparison of the old and new framework, read our guide to the NPPF 2026 changes.
Find the Starting Point That Fits Your Land
The same policy does not apply to every field, yard or residential plot. These characteristics help identify which opportunities should be checked before making assumptions about value.
| What describes the land? | Where the assessment starts |
|---|---|
| A walk from a well-connected station | S5(1)(h) or GB7(1)(h), depending on Green Belt status, together with L3 density requirements. |
| A site or existing plot within a built-up area | The settlement definition, S4 and, where relevant, the effective-use provisions in L2. |
| Land capable of providing homes the area needs | The evidence supporting HO7 and whether S5(1)(j) or another location policy provides a suitable route. |
| A gap, redundant site or other land in the Green Belt | The separate infill, brownfield, Grey Belt and station categories in GB7. |
| A large holding or land that could be assembled | HO4 and the infrastructure, masterplanning and delivery requirements for strategic growth. |
| A smaller parcel near an established community | Smaller-site allocations under HO6 and, where appropriate, affordable housing exception sites. |
More than one characteristic may be relevant. A review should consider how the policies work together and whether the whole site, or only a defined part, benefits.
A Station Connection Can Change the Development Worth Testing
A parcel previously assessed mainly as countryside may deserve another look if it has a practical connection to a qualifying station. The assessment needs to establish both the policy route and the scale of residential or mixed-use development that could work.
Establish whether the station qualifies
The Annex B definition covers railway, Underground, tram and light-rail stops in a top-80 Travel to Work Area by Gross Value Added, located wholly or partly in England. The normal weekday timetable must provide, throughout the daytime, at least four services an hour in total or two an hour in any one direction. Planned upgrades or an agreement with the operator can count where there is a reasonable prospect of achieving the required service. The NPPF specifies which economic data must be used.
Reasonable walking distance is around 800 metres, or around 10 minutes on foot where the terrain, route quality or availability, or physical barriers would prevent or discourage a walk from up to 800 metres away. If only part of the land meets this test, the relevant station provisions apply to that part.
Apply the route for the site’s location
S5(1)(h) covers residential and mixed-use proposals outside settlements. It excludes Green Belt and designated Local Green Space. Its four requirements are:
- A position within reasonable walking distance of a qualifying station.
- A good physical relationship with that station or the settlement containing it.
- A development scale that the available or proposed infrastructure can accommodate.
- Compatibility with proposals for comprehensive development of the wider location over the longer term.
For Green Belt land, GB7(1)(h) provides a separate category with those same four tests and a further requirement for major proposals to meet GB8’s Golden Rules. Qualifying development is treated as not inappropriate in Green Belt. This station category has no separate Grey Belt or housing-shortfall requirement.
Use the right density and area in a capacity assessment
L3(2)(c) sets a minimum of 35 dwellings per hectare of net developable area for qualifying residential or mixed-use station schemes. The minimum becomes 45 where service frequency is at least double the qualifying level, and higher densities should be achieved where possible. Exceptions are limited to traveller sites and sites below the major-development threshold where the standard is demonstrably inappropriate or cannot be met.
For this calculation, net developable area includes homes and directly associated uses such as access roads, gardens, parking and incidental open spaces. It excludes land needed for strategic infrastructure, parks, public squares and significant drainage or biodiversity features.
Those figures influence the type of scheme to investigate. The usable area, housing mix, design and infrastructure still need to work together before a credible value assessment can be made. Our station development guide explores this location in more detail.
Look Beyond the Present Use of a Plot or Building
Land within a settlement
S4 establishes a favourable balance for development within settlements: the national policy starting point supports approval unless adverse effects would substantially outweigh the benefits. An existing housing allocation is not a condition for considering this policy.
The boundary assessment matters. The NPPF definition includes towns, villages and other predominantly built-up areas, together with allocated or permitted development that will become part of them. It generally leaves out hamlets and scattered housing unless the development plan identifies them as settlements, and excludes villages defined as part of the Green Belt.
A suitable proposal must address the relevant safeguards, including protected and safeguarded uses, recreation and green space, environmental interests, neighbouring living conditions and land used for burial or flood-management purposes. A vacant appearance alone does not establish that land is available for housing.
Getting more from land that is already in use
L2 gives substantial weight to the benefits of remedying damaged or contaminated land, using vacant or underused premises more effectively, and appropriate temporary uses of previously developed land pending an anticipated longer-term scheme. Within settlements, it also supports suitable opportunities to build upwards, redevelop sensitively or add development within existing plots.
For residential plots, the assessment includes the street scene, safe access, daylight, sunlight, privacy and amenity space. The general L2 limits retain at least 50% of the existing undeveloped area and restrict the resulting building footprint to no more than twice that of the existing buildings, using the framework’s publication-date baseline. The policy allows an exception where more development can be accommodated without harm to the area’s overall character, taking account of infrastructure and a sustainable location.
For example, an underused commercial plot may justify testing a different layout or housing use. The assessment would examine the relevant policy support, the lawful use, access and retained space before estimating capacity. Residential gardens and former agricultural buildings are not automatically brownfield land.
Outside settlements, S5(1)(d) and S5(1)(e) also identify qualifying brownfield redevelopment and limited infilling within groups of houses. These routes exclude Green Belt and designated Local Green Space.
The Homes Needed Locally Can Shape the Proposal
The value of an opportunity depends in part on what can sensibly be proposed. Evidence of a need for affordable homes, family housing, accessible accommodation or homes for older people may point towards a more appropriate scheme than a generic layout.
Weight given to meeting housing needs
Under HO7, substantial weight is given to homes that help meet the community’s evidenced accommodation needs. The evidence comes from the authority’s assessments and other relevant material. The benefit needs to be connected to a realistic number, type and tenure of homes, with the applicable affordable housing requirements addressed.
A route for addressing an unmet need outside settlements
S5(1)(j) can support development addressing an evidenced unmet need where its tests are satisfied. For residential proposals, the review asks:
- What unmet need is established, and how would the proposal help meet it? Examples include a council lacking five years of deliverable housing supply or recording a Housing Delivery Test result below 75%.
- Is the site physically well-related to an existing settlement, unless that would be inappropriate for the nature of the development?
- Can existing or planned infrastructure support the amount of development proposed?
The supply and delivery examples are not exhaustive under S5(1)(j), so evidence about a particular accommodation need can matter. The current plan, relevant transitional provisions and the actual housing offer must all be reviewed. Where the land sits beyond an unfinished allocation, its location also needs to make sense if the allocated scheme is not delivered.
S5 does not apply to Green Belt or designated Local Green Space. An affordable housing offer can add a benefit, but the evidence and the appropriate location policy must support the complete proposal.
Identify the Particular Opportunity Within a Green Belt Holding
Green Belt land should be assessed against the relevant category in GB7. A label on a map does not tell you whether a limited infill scheme, redevelopment, a qualifying Grey Belt proposal or the station route is the right possibility to investigate.
A modest gap in an existing village — GB7(1)(c)
Limited infilling in a village lying within the Green Belt is a recognised category of development that is not inappropriate. The size of the gap, the extent of building proposed and its relationship to the village need to support an infill assessment. There is no universal number of homes that qualifies; the local pattern and context are central.
Redevelopment of an already developed site — GB7(1)(e)
Qualifying previously developed land may offer a redevelopment opportunity, including residential or mixed-use development containing housing, where substantial harm to Green Belt openness would be avoided. Establishing the lawful history and the true brownfield extent is an early part of reviewing a redundant yard or commercial site.
Land with Grey Belt characteristics — GB7(1)(g)
The national Grey Belt definition can cover previously developed or greenfield land. In either case, it must not strongly contribute to any of three purposes: checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas, preventing neighbouring towns from merging, or preserving the setting and special character of historic towns. The assessment should follow Annex E.
A proposal using GB7(1)(g) must meet all four requirements:
- It uses Grey Belt and would not fundamentally undermine the purposes, considered together, of the Green Belt remaining across the plan area.
- There is evidenced unmet need for the proposed form of development.
- The location is sustainable, with particular reference to TR3.
- Where major development includes housing, it meets GB8.
For housing under this Grey Belt category, the specified unmet-need test is the absence of a five-year deliverable supply including the appropriate buffer, or a Housing Delivery Test result below 75%. General housing demand on its own does not establish this test.
The separate station category should also be checked where relevant. A qualifying GB7 application can be considered while the land remains Green Belt. Read our Grey Belt planning guide for more on identifying the land’s characteristics.
Account for Affordable Housing, Infrastructure and Green Space
A favourable planning route needs a scheme that can deliver its required contributions. These requirements should be considered when testing the layout and assessing the potential value of the land.
GB8’s Golden Rules apply to major development involving housing, including relevant mixed-use schemes, on Green Belt land or land released through a plan review, subject to the specified exceptions. They cover:
- Affordable housing: the applicable development-plan Green Belt requirement. Until that policy exists, the interim requirement is 15 percentage points above the highest existing affordable housing requirement otherwise applying, capped at 50%. If no existing requirement applies, 50% is the default.
- Infrastructure: necessary improvements to local or national infrastructure.
- Public green space: provision or improvements that put good-quality space within a short walk of the homes, support the landscape setting and nature recovery, and meet the relevant standards.
The 50% cap does not cover every case: rural and community-led exception sites and relevant existing local policies above 50% have different treatment. GB8 also identifies historic permissions and land releases that are exempt. A viability case for departing from the Golden Rules is only available in its specified circumstances.
This is why the assessment should consider both the homes a policy could support and the requirements that would accompany them. A housing number without a deliverable mix, infrastructure allowance and land budget gives only part of the picture.
The Size of the Holding Can Point Towards a Different Route
Larger sites and coordinated growth — HO4
A sizeable holding, or adjoining land that can be assembled, may be relevant to a new settlement, an urban quarter or a significant settlement extension. HO4 provides a plan-making basis for identifying suitable housing-led strategic locations where appropriate.
Such land needs infrastructure and facilities at the right stages of delivery; access to services and employment within the new community or through sustainable connections to larger towns; and an approach to strategic environmental opportunities and safeguards. Masterplanning, an appropriate tenure mix, land assembly and a realistic delivery programme help establish a credible allocation case.
For the owner, the potential may therefore depend on a wider scheme and a longer delivery programme. HO4 informs the development plan; it is not a standalone permission for a large field.
Smaller parcels and village growth — HO6
HO6 asks Local Plans to allocate at least 10% of their housing requirement on sites of no more than one hectare, plus a further 10% on sites between one and two and a half hectares, unless strong reasons prevent the targets being achieved. It also calls for sites that help rural communities and villages thrive, especially by supporting local services.
A smaller parcel with suitable access and a realistic delivery prospect can therefore have a useful role in the council’s site supply. Size should be considered alongside its location and practical capacity.
Other possibilities to check
Affordable and community-led exception sites: HO10 can support qualifying unallocated sites outside settlements. It covers rural affordable housing for evidenced local needs and qualifying community-led development. Unless the development plan provides otherwise, sites should adjoin or be physically well-related to a settlement, include affordable housing, and keep the extent of built development within one hectare or 5% of the settlement’s size, whichever is greater. Rural needs evidence must be no more than five years old. A market element may be acceptable where essential to deliver affordable homes without grant funding. Green Belt proposals also need a relevant Green Belt route.
Station land through a boundary review: under GB3(4), where a development plan’s spatial strategy identifies suitable land around well-connected stations for development, exceptional circumstances do not have to be demonstrated to justify altering the Green Belt boundary. Other Green Belt boundary reviews require the appropriate evidenced justification after reasonable alternatives have been examined.
Turn the Policy Opportunity Into an Informed View of Value
A land assessment becomes more useful when it connects a planning opportunity to a plausible scheme. The important questions are how much of the site could be developed, what would be built, what needs to be provided and how the opportunity could progress.
| Assessment question | Why it matters to the landowner |
|---|---|
| What area can accommodate the scheme? | A site plan distinguishes the area used to calculate housing density from space for strategic infrastructure or major landscape, drainage and ecological features. A station policy may also cover only part of the holding. |
| What type and mix of development is supportable? | The housing mix, affordable provision and any employment or community uses influence design, delivery requirements and the appraisal. |
| How far has the planning case progressed? | An initial policy possibility, a Local Plan allocation and an implementable permission represent different levels of evidence and certainty. |
| What must be funded or resolved? | Access rights, services, remediation, surveys, infrastructure, contributions and other site requirements need to be understood. |
| When and how could development be delivered? | Phasing, infrastructure timing, land assembly and the market for the proposed development affect the assumptions used in a value assessment. |
Understand what a development value figure represents
Gross development value (GDV) is the estimated value of the completed development. To assess what might be available to pay for the land, an appraisal must also consider construction and site costs, infrastructure, planning obligations, professional fees, finance and the developer’s return. Government viability guidance explains the role of these inputs.
For example, a station-related housing opportunity may justify a fresh capacity study, but its value assessment still needs the qualifying site area and the costs of delivering the required scheme. A higher headline density alone does not establish the amount a purchaser would pay.
We use the initial review to identify the opportunities that deserve further investigation and the information needed for a better-informed decision. A current assessment is more useful than applying a generic price per acre to land whose planning and delivery position has not been established.
Start With the Location and the Information You Already Have
Use the enquiry form to provide your contact details, the land’s postcode and its approximate size. You do not need to prepare a planning application before asking for an initial review.
If available, keep a boundary plan, details of the current use and access, previous planning decisions, council site assessments and existing reports ready for follow-up. They help establish what has already been investigated and whether a different 2026 policy route could change the assessment.
Value My Land offers a free, no-obligation initial review. We can explain which opportunities appear relevant and what would need to be established before deciding on the next stage. If you would prefer to start with an online indication, you can also use our Land Development Assessment Tool.
Questions About the Planning Changes and Your Land
Explore a Particular Part of Your Assessment
Policy basis: the August 2026 NPPF for England. Reviewed on . Read the official location policies, housing policies, land-use and density policies and Green Belt policies.