Planning reforms explained: what does the ‘default yes’ for development near railway stations mean?

The UK Government is currently consulting on proposals to reform national planning policies in England. It represents the most significant overhaul of the planning system since 2012 and the CLA has been analysing what this means for members.

The consultation proposes to amend many policies that impact CLA members and other land managers, but also proposes new concepts such as a ‘default yes’ to development around railway stations, including those located within the green belt. In this blog, we explore what this means practically for members with land adjacent to or within proximity of railway stations.

The new government proposal may sound radical, but it’s important to stress that the policy is not the introduction of a new permitted development right and will not operate in a similar way. Developers must still submit planning applications for these sites, and the submissions will be assessed against planning policies - particularly those concerning the natural environment, heritage assets and design quality.

Instead, the policy creates a strong presumption in favour of development around some, but not all, railway stations. The policy applies to stations located within settlements, however, for stations located within the green belt or on land outside of settlements, only those that are ‘well connected’ will qualify.

The aim is to encourage higher density, transit-oriented development where public transport access is already strong.

The draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) introduces a specific definition of a ‘well connected’ station. To qualify, such a station must:

1. Be located within a top 60 Travel to Work Area (TTWA) in England by Gross Value Added (GVA), and
2. Be served throughout the daytime by four trains or trams per hour overall, or two trains or trams per hour in any one direction (Including where upgrades or operator agreements give a reasonable prospect of achieving this)

A TTWA is not a new concept; these areas are analysed by the Office for National Statistics and are defined by commuting patterns. TTWAs capture existing functioning economic geographies and employment catchment areas. They have been ranked against GVA to identify areas that have the most potential to support growth in areas with suitable transport infrastructure.

One of the most notable aspects of the proposal is its prescriptive density requirement. The draft NPPF sets out:

• A minimum of 40 dwellings per hectare around all stations
• A minimum of 50 dwellings per hectare for sites around well connected stations

While the policy recognises that not every station can accommodate the same level of growth, it does establish a baseline expectation for how much development should be delivered.

There is no doubt that this proposed policy could unlock substantial development opportunities, but, in its current form, the draft proposal risks leaving CLA members at a disadvantage.

As the definition of a ‘well connected’ station only applies to the top 60 TTWAs, there is a risk that many stations in rural areas will not benefit from the policy simply because they do not meet the GVA threshold to be included. The consultation also fails to acknowledge that GVA for rural areas is far lower than for urban areas.

When exploring the areas within the top 60, there are examples of mainline stations on London commuter routes missing out, and if this is the case, it is inevitable that stations in rural areas are not eligible. The policy as drafted fails to acknowledge that there are sustainable and suitable sites adjacent to railway stations outside the top 60 TTWAs.

A further disadvantage to stations in rural areas is the infrequency of trains per hour. Many stations in these areas do not meet the service frequency requirement except at peak times. These sites will also be excluded from the default yes for development despite having good connectivity during key commuter periods and playing a strategic role in rural settlement patterns.

Following discussions with CLA Policy Committee members, the CLA will be supporting the proposal. However, we urge the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to consider a revised definition for a ‘well connected’ station to allow additional TTWAs to be captured. By extending the definition to the top 80 areas by GVA, it would align with the CLA’s wider ask for the development of a small number of homes in a large number of villages.

The government must also reconsider the frequency of trains either by removing this part of the policy or acknowledging that trains during peak times are just as relevant. Should the MHCLG adopt these amendments, it would also deliver a significantly larger number of homes through this method, contributing to the government’s ambition to deliver 1.5m homes before the end of this Parliament

The CLA will be responding to the NPPF consultation by the deadline of 10 March 2026 and has been engaging with members via our national committees. The consultation will also be discussed by CLA Branch Committees and we welcome any members with comments on the consultation to contact the CLA’s Planning Adviser, Shannon Fuller, at shannon.fuller@cla.org.uk.