Comment

Where next for contextual design, townscape and placemaking in the new draft NPPF

Ever since the first publication of the NPPF back in 2012, the requirement for good design has been embedded into the core objective of achieving sustainable development nationally. With each subsequent revision of the NPPF, tandem Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) updates, and the first publication of the supporting National Design Guide in 2019, placemaking and good design for our urban areas has been ever more embedded in national policy. This growing focus has been positively reflected in practice and the delivery of new development.

The new draft NPPF proposes a new structure, revised chapter and also new policies under the title of “Achieving Well-designed Places” (new Chapter 14), the theme of which stretches across many policy areas and other chapters. This latest in our NPPF series considers what these changes may mean in practice, particularly for placemaking and the delivery of good design in a townscape context.

What has been maintained?

The headline objective for the new format of specific policies in Chapter 14 is:

“… to promote well-designed, healthy, inclusive and sustainable places, through setting clear expectations about design outcomes and the use of relevant tools and processes”.

This objective re-iterates the key themes of the existing chapter. However, in our view, both the wording and the overall structure and specificity of new policies represent a more assertive and clearly defined imperative to deliver good design through both plan-making and decision-making. It is positive, and should be supported, that the importance of good placemaking through development has been retained as a key strand of the NPPF.

The principle that development that is not well-designed should be refused is retained. So too is the planning weight – now defined as “substantial” – that is required to be given in favour of outstanding or innovative designs in the development process.

These provisions sit alongside the broader objective in the new draft NPPF (including both Chapters 12 and 15), which is to retain and strengthen the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Notably, this presumption is now reframed with a more location-led approach and with clearer expectations on what development should deliver.

What are the changes?

• Design Guides, Design Codes and masterplans all receive a boost in terms of their importance in the process. They are no longer relegated to guidance, instead the value of their preparation is now proposed to be set out in national policy. This is welcome as design codes can be an effective tool at early stages of development (i.e. at outline) or for projects with a longer term or phased delivery. Policy DP1 1b sets out instances in which design codes may be appropriate, however this will need to be agreed on a case by case basis, including whether a design code would actually be helpful and also an appropriate scope to reflect the scale of the development proposed. This appears a sensibly proportionate approach.
• New policies in Chapter 14 also adopt a stronger position on encouraging the use of the design review for significant development proposals; on the value of that process; and in looking to ensure that outcomes are taken fully into account as part of decision-making. This may result in more schemes being referred to Design Review Panels and a greater focus on implementing their recommendations. However, design review panels can be both a blessing and also sometimes a curse for schemes, particularly if engagement with them happens at the wrong time, or differences of opinion arise between a panel and officers. 
• The key principles for good design set out in DP3 are a clearer and pithier version of the principles set out in the existing NPPF. There is a greater focus on the importance of context (1a) which could see a greater focus and growth in townscape work more generally, including where that interfaces with heritage matters. 
• Where the core objective of achieving well-designed places through development intersects with other policy areas in the new draft NPPF, the important link between design and climate change mitigation and adaptation, the transition to net zero, and the wider green infrastructure is set out more clearly in Chapter 14; as a further positive move.
• Although other practitioners may also have noticed that specific policy on trees for new development has been removed from Chapter 14; do not worry, this has been moved to the new Chapter 19: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment.
• Reassuringly, the current consultation confirms that the Government intends to publish updated Design and Placemaking Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) alongside the new NPPF. This is expected to provide the more technical guidance on the implementation of the new policies, and would replace or otherwise consolidate the existing National Design Guide, Design Process and Tools Planning Practice Guidance, National Model Design Code Parts 1 and 2.
• One significant change is the requirement for LPAs to seek higher densities around train stations, with a presumption in favour of approving housing located within walking distance of well-connected railway stations, including land within the countryside and the Green Belt, not just typically urban locations. This is set out clearly in Chapter 12 and 15, and also inevitably links to contextual design matters and Chapter 14.
• The onus will be on urban designers and architects to continue to work hard to demonstrate how greater height and massing can deliver successful and attractive places. Creating clear street hierarchies, active ground floors, legible movement, well-defined public and amenity space, quality architecture and use of materials, integral greenery, safeguarding daylight etc. all remain important ways to help achieve that policy imperative. 
• It is important to note, however, that the presumption in favour of intensification around transport hubs includes a caveat that presumption does not apply where such development could prejudice plans for long-term, comprehensive schemes. For example, where an existing station is planned to become the centre of a new town in future.
• Throughout the new draft NPPF, there is also a broader policy position driving urban and suburban densification more generally. This includes further encouragement for the redevelopment of corner sites and other low-density plots, upward extensions to existing buildings, and infill development within the established townscape context (including within residential curtilages) (including Chapter 12). 
• Overall, the direction of the new draft also sets clear expectations for LPAs to establish minimum densities in the most sustainable locations, such as town and city centres and areas around train stations, and to support increased density within settlements more generally. Brownfield development would be supported with the only exception being unless the “harms would substantially outweigh the benefits” (including Chapter 4). Overall, there is a much stronger and clearly articulated expectation to optimise the efficient use of land in areas where housing delivery is needed and accessibility is good, with a lesser focus on the local context or interpretation of their policies.

A key question: how can the balance between design standards and pace of change be maintained?

The new draft NPPF raises a key question: how can design standards be maintained, and raised, when delivering such a step change in the pace of delivery, scale, intensification and diversity of development across our towns and cities? Equally, how do we ensure that newly created places, or those undergoing change, are places where people genuinely want to live, work and play?

Design quality, and how this responds positively to townscape context, needs to keep pace with policy ambition. Perhaps we should be reassured that the new draft NPPF confirms and more clearly articulates that substantial weight should be given to proposals delivering high-quality design, alongside other key objectives such as energy efficiency and the economic benefits of development.

Overall, many of these changes are to be welcomed, both at the plan-making and decision-making stages. The new draft NPPF strengthens and clarifies focus on design guides or coding, expert design advice and the key principles for good placemaking. These are areas where our experience and expertise in townscape and visual analysis play a key role.

For more information on heritage, townscape and visual matters, please contact Richard Brookes.

21 January 2026