MHCLG revises NPPF following typographical error highlighted in Grey Belt Appeal Decision
Earlier today, MHCLG quietly revised the December 2024 version of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Before you start to panic, the changes are not substantive. For the most part, they correct typographical errors. However, the story behind one of them is quite interesting*, hence this post.
Before I get into that, however, I should probably summarise the changes.
This can be dealt with quite briefly:
- In Footnote 7 the phrase “habitat sites (and those sites listed in paragraph 189)” has been amended so that it now reads “habitat sites (and those sites listed in paragraph 194)”
- In Footnote 8 the reference to “paragraph 227” has been updated to refer to “paragraph 232”; and
- The opening sentence of Paragraph 155 has been changed from:
- “The development of homes, commercial and other development in the Green Belt should also not be regarded as inappropriate where:” to
- “The development of homes, commercial and other development in the Green Belt should also not be regarded as inappropriate where all the following apply:” (my emphasis)
Now for those of you who have not yet memorised the paragraph numbers in the new NPPF**, Paragraph 155 is the paragraph that sets out the circumstances in which building on grey belt land does not constitute inappropriate development in the green belt. So, it is an important one.
Whilst some might argue that the tweak to the wording of para 155 goes beyond a mere typographical correction; the revised wording does match how PINS (and others) have largely been interpreting the requirements to date.
Also, MHCLG has been keen to stress “For the avoidance of doubt the amendment to paragraph 155 is not intended to constitute a change to the policy set out in the Framework as published on 12 December 2024.” Which seems fair.
Now, in order to understand why I find these very minor amendments so interesting, we will need to go back a couple of weeks, to the publication of the Chapel Lane Appeal Decision. This is the appeal decision that used Paragraph 155 to grant permission for a temporary 49.35MW battery energy storage facility in the Green Belt around Walsall. A fuller summary of the facts can be found here.
Paragraph 21 of that appeal decision states:
This then takes us to the following footnote:
Which is the very first correction that MHCLG has made in this latest update.
This is the first time (or at least the first time that I am aware of) that national policy appears to have been corrected as a result of the efforts of an eagle-eyed Planning Inspector!
Whilst this may all be purely coincidental; I am choosing to take it as a victory for pedants*" everywhere!
*at least to me
**in all honesty, this includes me, but para 155 has rather stuck in the brain
*" and footnotes
This version of the National Planning Policy Framework was amended on 7 February 2025 to correct cross-references from footnotes 7 and 8, and amend the end of the first sentence of paragraph 155 to make its intent clear. For the avoidance of doubt the amendment to paragraph 155 is not intended to constitute a change to the policy set out in the Framework as published on 12 December 2024.”
Key Contact
