With the emerging National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) set to reshape the planning landscape, Local Plans are under greater scrutiny than ever, particularly in Green Belt authorities. I wanted to understand the scale of the issue, so I undertook a high-level review of the numbers on Local Plan adoption and Green Belt appeals.

The first and most telling stat is that just 20% of all authorities have adopted a Local Plan in the past five years. During that period annual adoption rates have plummeted from 25-40 Plans a year, to only 10-15. At this pace, achieving full coverage within five years—which would require 63 Plans annually—feels like a distant dream.

This national slowdown stems from dramatic swings in national policy over the past few years, particularly on Green Belt issues. It is no surprise then that Green Belt authorities (defined as those having at least 10% Green Belt coverage), have delivered just 11% of newly adopted Local Plans in the past five years, despite accounting for 45% of councils nationally.

Releasing Green Belt land has long been politically contentious, but the new NPPF raises the stakes even higher. Under the revised Standard Method for calculating housing requirements, Green Belt authorities are looking at a 40% increase in housing need, compared to a 23% national average.

As a reaction to this, some, like St Albans and Bournemouth, Christchurch & Poole, are sprinting to submission to qualify for a lower Standard Method provision under transitional rules. Others, such as Three Rivers, hit pause after other Green Belt authorities struggled with their Examination.

Elmbridge’s experience is a cautionary tale in this regard. Their Local Plan, which proposed no Green Belt release and fell far short of meeting the Standard Method, was deemed unsound by an Inspector. The decision had a significant impact on local authorities approaching Examination faltering amidst fears of the same outcome. Adding further pressure, Matthew Pennycook’s letter to the Planning Inspectorate instructed Inspectors to allow only six-month pauses for examination and limit the use of pragmatism. 

Despite these challenges, delays have actually been fewer than expected. Only ten councils have “officially” delayed their Local Plans, eight of which are Green Belt authorities. The explanation for this lies in the growing number of successful Green Belt appeals. Over the past year, the number of successful appeals for residential development in Green Belt areas has surged, with nearly all of them occurring in locations where Local Plans are over a decade old.

Earlier successful appeals tended to be on sites earmarked in emerging or draft plans, but a stark shift has occurred. Now, nearly half of appeals succeed on sites with no draft allocation history. This trend is expected to gather pace in 2025, driven by the revised NPPF, Grey Belt provisions, and an increase in Secretary of State call-ins.

So, what happens next? With relatively few Local Plans currently at the Examination Stage, significant coverage increases in the short term are unlikely. Some authorities like Enfield have shown that even under the pressures of Green Belt constraints, it is possible to meet targets by justifying the loss of Green Belt through increased levels of affordable housing.

While these authorities are in the minority, the Government is banking on the pressure created by the new NPPF to compel more councils to follow this strategy and pursue ambitious Local Plans.

In the meantime, it will be a very busy 2025 for the Planning Inspectorate, with the short-term outcome of the Government’s pressure cooker strategy paving the way for a large number of appeals in Green Belt authorities without an up-to-date Local Plan.