However, this overhaul could change the face of Lancashire.

The as-dry-as-it-sounds announcement from the UK Government dropped with a fanfare about building more homes near train stations and preventing pub conversions, but these were just two of the most headline-grabbing changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

While handing developers an almost automatic yes for building higher-density housing near rail links could create as many as half a million homes according to analysis by consultancy Lichfields, these changes will also see some power over planning applications centralised and taken out of the hands of local councils.

As of Monday, August 17, a majority of the development decisions that have historically been in the hands of local planning committees will likely end up being decided by council officers, applying new National Decision-Making Policies.

Fewer decisions will be made my planning committee under the streamlined new planning rules (Image: Will Morgan)

These decisions will be made in accordance with up-to-date Local Plans, the increasingly important blueprints agreed by local authorities that set out where new homes, infrastructure, and businesses can be built.

The experts at PWA Planning, one of the largest firms of its kind in the North West, have spoken to the Lancashire Telegraph about what this new NPPF means for local decision-making.

Green Belt development near stations

The revised NPPF, published on August 17, introduces a new presumption in favour of residential and mixed-use development within walking distance of certain "well-connected" rail, tram and underground stations.

PWA director Paul Forshaw said this builds on the Government's introduction of the "grey belt" concept in late 2024 but goes considerably further.

"There has always been a presumption against development in the Green Belt," he said.

While grey belt development remains tied to demonstrating housing need, he said the new station policy allows some development in the Green Belt without first proving unmet housing demand.

While the change will make it easier to build around train stations, it is unlikely to affect Blackburn (Image: NQ)

"The important point here is that, unlike grey belt development, there is no need for it to be evidenced that there is a need for housing development for housing around stations to be considered appropriate development in the Green Belt."

The policy does not apply everywhere. The Government has limited it to stations within England's 80 largest travel-to-work areas and those served by frequent public transport services.

The NPPF defines a reasonable walking distance as around 800 metres, or roughly 10 minutes on foot.

For much of East Lancashire, the practical impact may therefore depend on whether sites fall within the qualifying station catchments.

The main transport hub that would be affected by this, Blackburn Railway Station, is unlikely to spark a wave of housebuilding, as there are already a number of sites earmarked for development within walking distance – like the former Thwaites brewery site.

A ‘default yes’ inside settlements

Perhaps less widely reported is the Government's overhaul of the so-called presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Previous versions of the NPPF relied heavily on the ‘tilted balance’ test, which came into play when councils lacked up-to-date plans or sufficient housing land supply.

This test recently caused a 300-home development to be approved near Langho, against Ribble Valley Council’s wishes, because the borough does not have a provable five-year supply of housing.

(Image: Will Morgan)

But the new framework replaces that approach with a more explicit presumption in favour of development within established settlements, unless the harms substantially outweigh the benefits.

PWA Planning’s director explained this is less of a policy revolution and more of a clarification.

"In policy terms, this is not a change to how the planning system should have been operating previously, but the change now makes this more explicit," Mr Forshaw said.

The framework also provides a clearer list of development types that may be acceptable outside settlement boundaries, including some forms of rural, tourism, previously-developed land and station-related development.

What does it mean for Local Plans?

Despite concerns that councils are losing influence, Mr Forshaw said Local Plans will remain the foundation of planning decisions.

A Local Plan is a council's legally adopted blueprint setting out where development should take place and where it should not.

"Local Plans are still important, and the Government is placing great emphasis on councils having an up-to-date Local Plan," Mr Forshaw said.

Hyndburn Council's Huncoat Garden Village development is a major part of its Local Plan's housing allocation (Image: Hyndburn Counci)

Blackburn with Darwen's Local Plan was adopted in 2025, while Hyndburn’s was adopted in July of this year.

Burnley’s version was approved in 2018 and is likely to need updating, as the NPPF now expect them to be reviewed every five years.

However, future plans are expected to be slimmer documents than before.

The new NPPF introduces ‘National Decision-Making Policies’, covering issues such as flood risk, highways, design and town centre protection, meaning councils will not need to repeat large sections of policy that are now set nationally.

Instead, Local Plans are expected to focus more heavily on strategic questions such as where development should take place, housing requirements and spatial growth strategies.

This is aimed at addressing one of the main complaints about the UK’s planning system, that it is complicated and slow-moving, even for straightforward developments.

What this means for Lancashire

For councils such as Blackburn with Darwen, Hyndburn and Burnley, the immediate practical impact may be less about a flood of new planning applications and more about pressure to keep local plans up to date, particularly ahead of local government reorganisation which will see them merged into one council.

Authorities with current plans and sufficient housing allocations will still have significant control over where development goes.

But councils relying on older policies may increasingly find national policies carrying greater weight when difficult applications reach committee or appeal.

The long-term effect could be a planning system that is more nationally standardised, with local plans focused on deciding where growth happens rather than setting detailed rules on how every application should be judged.

PWA Planning’s director explained: “I don’t see it changing the ability of councils to be able to refuse unacceptable development. 

“What it does do is provide a more level playing field across the country, where there previously were large variations between development management policies. 

“The changes provide more clarity and certainty to developers and local communities on what type of development is and isn’t acceptable.”