🏘️Previously developed land (PDL) – the NPPF now clearly defines this to include sites with permanent structures and fixed infrastructure. Think beyond buildings – areas of lawful hardstanding could qualify. Key exclusions: agricultural buildings, restored mineral sites, and structures blended into landscape.

🗺️ Sites that don’t meaningfully contribute to Green Belt purposes (NPPF 143), especially if they:

– Are enclosed by development on three sides
– Don’t prevent towns merging
– Aren’t critical to a historic setting

🏪 Where there’s demonstrable unmet need for housing (NPPF 155) – particularly relevant where authorities lack a 5-year housing supply.

For larger developments, NPPF paragraph 157 sets out the ‘Golden Rules’:
– Affordable housing contribution 15% above the highest existing local requirement (capped at 50%);
– Essential infrastructure improvements;
– New or enhanced publicly accessible green spaces within walking distance;
– 50% affordable housing as default where no pre-existing requirement exists.

NPPF paragraph 149 states we shouldn’t include land in Green Belt “which it is unnecessary to keep permanently open” – a significant consideration for enclosed sites.

For PDL sites, NPPF paragraph 125(c) gives “substantial weight” to appropriate redevelopment within settlements. Combined with paragraph 155, this creates compelling arguments for well-designed schemes.

I’m finding early site analysis and strategic planning input are crucial before moving to detailed design. Many of my clients are surprised to learn their previously “unviable” sites might now have potential.

Happy to discuss if you’re working on similar projects.