Planning matters

The Government has begun a consultation on the usability of the proposed consolidation of the Design and Placemaking Planning Practice Guidance (DPPPG). The draft DPPPG is intended to support the application of policies in the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2025, which is currently being consulted upon – see Lichfields blogs on this here.

 

It is not standard practice for MHCLG to consult on planning guidance updates; however, on this occasion the Government wants to “seek views on whether this consolidated approach improves usability and supports preparation of effective design and placemaking policies, tools and processes”. The consultation will last for 7 weeks from 21 January 2026 to 11:45pm on 10 March 2026.

 

Edward Clarke, Dominic Bowers and Matthew Spry’s blog here analyses how proposed NPPF policy L3 could unlock development potential equivalent to 632,600 homes on land at rail stations outside settlement boundaries. The blog also reminds us that whilst 632,600 homes might seem a lot, not all land will turn out to be available for development and there may be site-specific reasons that make development unfeasible in particular places.

 

In relation to density, 50 dwellings per hectare (dph) on the net developable area is the minimum density set in the proposed NPPF policy L3 for most scenarios[1]. The aim of building at increased densities to make better use of constrained land supply is not new and is promoted by the NPPF. However, this specific requirement raises questions about how sites coming forward would successfully achieve 50 dph, especially outside of urban areas and when site constraints come into play such as local context and character, Green Belt and landscape sensitivity. This blog therefore comments on how the draft DPPPG would support draft NPPF policy L3 in relation to achieving 50 dph.

 

 

Firstly, the draft DPPPG uses and amends a paragraph in the National Design Guide (2021) – see Table 1 Below showing new additions and amendments in bold to paragraph 59 of the National Design Guide in the draft DPPPG. The tone of this draft paragraph is perhaps more optimistic and supportive than the National Design Guide’s paragraph by emphasising that there can be benefits to reap when new development is “very different” to an existing place. The new references to “innovative” and “exceptional” development could show support for proposals that would respond to modern construction methods, changing 21st Century lifestyles and more sustainable ways of living; indeed, page 11 states that “new development can introduce elements that reflect how we live today, to include innovation or change such as increased densities and incorporate new sustainable features or systems”.

 

 

Secondly, reference to the appropriateness of scaling up the character of an existing place is removed presumably so as not restrict or hinder the manifestation of difference. The emergence of courtyard housing typologies is an example what departure from existing character might look like. Courtyard housing typologies create outward facing homes to animate streets and more private individual and communal gardens and courtyards to the rear. These typologies are popular amongst individuals, couples and families, especially because outdoor spaces and play spaces are conveniently nearby. There is a growing catalogue of exemplary medium density developments with innovative housing models that we should be looking at that feature modern townhouse typologies and reimagined mews house typologies – if you edit the filter to search for exemplary schemes at 50 dph on the Housing Design Award’s online catalogue[2] numerous entries appear…

 

Of course, difference is not always inappropriate or wrong and new development can draw influences on local character in numerous complementary ways such as through materiality, landscaping and local forms of architecture. Reference is also made to garden ‘towns’ instead of garden ‘villages’ in the draft DPPPG which appears to be a subtle shift towards supporting larger developments containing distinctive neighbourhoods with varying characters and densities to meet an average of 50 dph – Alkerden Gateway, part of Ebbsfleet Garden City, features as an example of this in the draft DPPPG.

 

Some view building at higher densities as a problem rather than an opportunity. Ultimately, higher densities can create popular, liveable and sustainable neighbourhoods that are well connected, walkable and contribute positively to wellbeing and placemaking. Indeed, Ebenezer Howard’s garden city movement in 1898 aimed to create communities at around 45 dph[3]. Successfully proposing higher densities requires a carefully coordinated and thought-out masterplan that has a strong vision and embeds placemaking principles – which is possible and should be the aim. A great example of this in the draft DPPPG is The Chocolate Quarter in Somerdale, Keynsham which includes up to 430 dwellings, a 60 bed care home, primary school, a local centre, community facilities and open space. Located approximately 50m from the Bath-Bristol railway line and Keynsham station, the scheme successfully shows how density is an output of good placemaking and responding to the site’s context to create a high quality garden neighbourhood. The site features six distinct character areas that vary in density to feature different housing typologies and there are a large number of terraced units with 36% of dwellings being flats. The lowest density areas are along the edges of the development to create a suitable transition with the open countryside – but overall – the scheme achieves a net density of 82 dph.

 

 

It is evident that optimising housing densities will remain central to meeting future housing and sustainability challenges. Turning to innovative and reimagined housing typologies should be promoted when considering density as we are seeing growing examples of how such an approach does not compromise the ability to successfully deliver community-oriented, sustainable, green, characterful and high-quality places that meet diverse housing needs.