BLOGS

A tighter framework meets a slowing pipeline

The 2026 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) arrives at an awkward moment for England's development sector. Permissions data tracked across local authority decisions shows the number of homes granted consent fell by roughly 12% year on year, continuing a pattern of planning throughput that has lagged behind government delivery ambitions for several consecutive quarters. Layered onto that backdrop, the revised NPPF hardens expectations around accessible homes — effectively pushing more schemes towards the equivalent of Part M4(2) "accessible and adaptable" standards as a baseline rather than an aspiration — while also sharpening local planning authorities' ability to insist on a defined mix of tenures, including social rent, affordable rent and discounted market sale, within the same consented scheme.

For institutional investors, lenders and developers, this is not a cosmetic policy update. It changes the inputs that feed viability appraisals, the terms on which local plans allocate land, and the negotiating position each side brings to major-site discussions. Schemes that previously treated accessibility and tenure mix as late-stage design or legal considerations will now need to model them from the earliest feasibility stage, because they interact directly with gross development value (GDV), build cost assumptions and the achievable mix of market versus affordable units.

Why permissions are falling as policy tightens

The 12% year-on-year decline in granted permissions did not happen in isolation. Planning application data shows a broader slowdown in the pipeline moving from submission through to decision, with local authorities facing resourcing pressure, more schemes requiring resubmission or amendment, and applicants front-loading additional technical evidence — including accessibility statements and tenure mix justifications — before authorities will validate applications.

This matters commercially because a lower flow of permissions concentrates competitive pressure on the stock of consented and allocated land that does exist. REalyse-style planning pipeline data, which tracks units by decision status, development type and tenure classification, suggests that schemes able to demonstrate compliance with accessible and mixed-tenure requirements from the outset are moving through committee with comparatively fewer conditions attached and shorter determination periods. For developers assembling a land pipeline, this reinforces the case for using granular planning data — not just headline unit numbers but tenure and accessibility attributes at scheme level — to assess which sites are genuinely "oven ready" under the new framework and which will require costly re-engineering.

The viability appraisal recalibration

Viability appraisals have always balanced land value, build costs and policy requirements against an acceptable developer return. The 2026 NPPF changes at least three of those variables simultaneously:

• Build costs rise at the margin. Accessible and adaptable specifications — wider circulation space, level access thresholds, reinforced walls for future adaptations — typically add a modest but non-trivial cost per unit, often estimated in the low single-digit percentage range of build cost depending on typology and existing specification baselines.

• Unit mix and GDV shift together. A higher mandated share of affordable or social rent tenures, sold or transferred at a discount to open market value, pulls blended GDV down per unit even where overall scheme density is unchanged. Comparable transaction data by tenure and property type — the kind REalyse captures across sales and rental transactions — becomes essential for stress-testing what a realistic blended sales value looks like once tenure mix is finalised.

- **Land value expectations must adjust earlier.** Where landowners and promoters have underwritten sites against historic tenure mix assumptions, the gap between expected and policy-compliant viability can only be closed by resetting land value expectations, which is a slower and more contentious negotiation than adjusting design specifications.

Lenders assessing development finance will need updated comparables and yield evidence that reflect mixed-tenure completions specifically, rather than relying on broad market averages that blend private sale and affordable stock. Gross-to-net yield differentials between private rented and affordable/social tenures, tracked at scheme and area level, give a more defensible basis for stress-testing debt serviceability on schemes with a heavier affordable or accessible-homes component.

Local plan policy and major-site negotiations

For local planning authorities, the NPPF's firmer line on accessible and mixed-tenure housing gives emerging local plans a clearer evidential basis to set higher baseline requirements — but it also raises the bar for the evidence authorities themselves must produce to justify those policies at examination. Expect local plans progressing through 2026 and 2027 to lean more heavily on demographic and affordability evidence — median income relative to local rents and prices, tenure composition by ward or postcode district, and projected demand for accessible housing linked to ageing population data — to support policy requirements that might otherwise be challenged as unviable by promoters.

On major sites, this is likely to extend negotiation timelines in the short term as both sides recalibrate expectations. Developers bringing forward large-scale or strategic sites should expect local authorities to request scheme-level breakdowns of accessible unit numbers and tenure splits earlier in pre-application discussions, rather than leaving them to be negotiated through a Section 106 agreement once a scheme is largely designed. Build-to-rent and co-living schemes, which already sit under distinct policy treatment in many local plans, may find the accessible homes requirement interacts differently with their typically higher-density, amenity-led unit mix, and this is an area where early engagement with planning officers will matter more than template compliance.

Outlook

The combination of a 12% fall in permissions and a policy framework that raises the bar on accessible and mixed-tenure delivery points to a more selective, evidence-led planning environment through the remainder of 2026. Sites that can demonstrate policy compliance early, backed by robust local comparables and realistic tenure-mix viability modelling, are likely to move through the system faster and command more credible land values. Those relying on outdated viability assumptions risk resubmissions, extended negotiation periods and a widening gap between expected and achievable land value — reinforcing the case for granular, up-to-date planning and market data at every stage of site appraisal.