New NPPF Confirms Greater Density is Part of the Housing Solution

Last week’s revised NPPF, which includes new updates following consultation, clearly indicates that the government considers increasing density of development to be part of the solution for delivering its promise of 1.5 million houses over the next five years.

Paragraph 11 of the NPPF has long been a central tenet of national policy, which enshrines the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The revised policy now encourages decisions that promote density. Decision-makers must now give ‘particular regard’ to policies that direct development: “to sustainable locations, making effective use of land, securing well-designed places and providing affordable homes, individually or in combination” (11 d) ii.)

Essentially, this will encourage decisions that promote tall and dense development in places with good public transport infrastructure. It is an unexpected change that was not included in the July draft but does support the wider ambitions of the government and its housing agenda.

The new NPPF has also removed paragraph 130, which stated that when applying the NPPF policies on density: “to existing urban areas, significant uplifts in the average density of residential development may be inappropriate if the resulting built form would be wholly out of character with the existing area. Such circumstances should be evidenced through an authority-wide design code which is adopted or will be adopted as part of the development plan.”

This policy was added to the NPPF in December 2023 and was widely seen as a means to restrict density. It has also helped some councils bolster reasons for refusal. Deleting it is a positive move, given that Chapter 12 provides sufficient safeguards for the character of places and design quality.

At the same time, the NPPF has removed the requirement for Councils to produce design codes at a district level and now emphasises the use of the National Model Design Code instead (Paragraph 138). This is a further sensible streamlining of Councils’ plan-making requirements.

The references to ‘beauty’ (also added in December last year) are now removed, as expected. The concept is considered to be too subjective and difficult to define. 80% of respondents to the consultation supported this change. Notably, these changes sit alongside the closure of the Office for Place in November, which had promoted the ‘beauty’ agenda, the use of authority-wide design codes, the idea of ‘gentle density’ (i.e. 3-7 storeys) and traditional architectural design. However, they are perhaps not surprising given New Labour’s legacy of Richard Roger’s Urban Task Force and the policies of London Mayor Ken Livingstone, which transformed the skyline of our capital city.

Above all, the new government’s more positive attitude to density and tall buildings is very welcome. It is now for the industry to respond with high-quality, well-designed development in the right locations to address housing needs and support economic growth.