Plan making reform: what changes for local plans
The 2023 Act rewrites how local plans are produced, from gateway checks and a 30 month timetable to supplementary plans and the end of the duty to co-operate. Here is what applies, and how to tell which system an authority is in.
Plan making reform in England rewrites how local plans are produced rather than what they contain. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 provides for a new-style local plan, national development management policies carrying development plan status, gateway checks during preparation, supplementary plans in place of supplementary planning documents, and the end of the duty to co-operate. Most of it arrives through regulations and policy rather than through the Act itself, so the practical question for anyone acting on a site is which system the relevant authority is actually in.
That question has a different answer in neighbouring districts, and getting it wrong changes which policies carry weight.
What the Act changes about plan preparation
Four structural changes matter most.
National development management policies would carry national policy with development plan status, so that local plans deal with locally specific matters rather than repeating national text. Anyone who has read a local plan policy that restates national policy in slightly different words will see the point, and anyone who has argued a conflict between the two will see the risk.
New-style local plans are intended to be shorter, digital by default, and produced to data standards that allow policies and allocations to be published as structured data rather than as a portable document.
Design codes become an expectation for authorities to prepare for their areas, building on the national model, a shift covered in more detail in the note on design codes and the National Model Design Code.
And the procedural machinery changes: a local plan timetable replaces the local development scheme, and the soundness tests applied at examination are to be revised.
Gateway checks and the timetable
The reform's headline is speed. Government has set out an intention that plan preparation should take around 30 months from start to adoption, against the several years many authorities currently take.
The mechanism is a set of gateway assessments at points during preparation, with the intention that problems capable of making a plan unsound are identified early rather than at examination. The number and timing of those checks, and what happens when a plan fails one, come from regulations and guidance rather than from the face of the Act.
Whether 30 months is achievable is the live question. The constraint on most authorities is not procedure, it is evidence base capacity, cross-boundary housing numbers and political willingness to allocate sites. A gateway check does not fix any of those, and an authority that cannot agree where the housing goes will not agree it faster because the timetable says so.
The duty to co-operate and what replaces it
The duty to co-operate is abolished by the Act. In its place, government has indicated an alignment policy set out in national policy rather than in statute.
That is a meaningful change for anyone who has run an unmet-need argument. The duty was a legal test applied at examination, and failure was fatal and unfixable: plans were withdrawn because of it. An alignment policy expressed in the framework would be a policy consideration weighed by an inspector rather than a legal hurdle.
The practical consequence is that cross-boundary arguments move from a procedural battleground into the merits. Whether that produces more strategic planning or less depends on how firmly the policy is written, and that is not something to predict.
Supplementary plans in place of SPDs
Supplementary planning documents are to be replaced by supplementary plans, prepared under a defined procedure including consultation and independent examination in specified cases, and carrying development plan status.
For applicants this cuts both ways. A supplementary plan with development plan status carries the weight of section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which is more than an SPD ever did. But the procedure to make one is heavier, so authorities may produce fewer of them.
Check what status a document holds before citing it. A Planning Statement that treats a supplementary planning document as though it were policy invites the officer to correct you, and one that ignores a supplementary plan carrying development plan status misses the point entirely.
Transitional arrangements for plans in progress
This is the part that decides what applies to your site today, and it is set by regulations and written ministerial statements rather than by the Act.
The pattern is a cut-off: plans submitted for examination before a stated date proceed under the existing system, and everything after that date moves to the new one. Those dates have been revised more than once, and further revision is possible, so check the current position rather than a summary written when the Act received Royal Assent.
| Question | Where to check |
|---|---|
| Which plan-making system applies | The authority's local plan timetable and the current transitional regulations |
| Stage the plan has reached | The council's local plan examination page and the Planning Inspectorate's examination documents |
| Age of the adopted plan | The adoption date on the plan itself, which drives how much weight it carries |
| Allocations and boundaries as data | The national planning data platform |
| Delivery performance | The authority's monitoring report and the published Housing Delivery Test results |
Housing land supply arguments
The point of a plan-led system is that up-to-date plans decide applications and the balancing exercise in national policy arises less often. Where plans are out of date, the opposite happens.
Whether a five year housing land supply must be demonstrated, what buffer applies, and what follows from a shortfall are all set by the National Planning Policy Framework, and they have changed with each edition. Work from the current edition, state the edition in any submission, and do not carry forward a form of words from an appeal statement written under an earlier one.
The interaction with plan making is straightforward to state and hard to predict. Faster plan preparation would reduce the number of authorities without an up-to-date plan, which would reduce the number of applications decided on supply arguments. Slower delivery than intended would leave the current pattern in place. What changes when a framework is reissued is set out in the note on what changes when the NPPF is re-issued.
Checking where a given authority sits
Five minutes of checking before a site appraisal saves a great deal later.
- Find the adopted plan and its adoption date, and read the policies map rather than only the written statement.
- Find the local plan timetable, which states what the authority intends to do and when.
- Check whether a new plan has been submitted for examination, and if so on what date, because that date usually determines which system applies.
- Look at the authority's most recent monitoring report for delivery against trajectory.
- Check the national planning data platform for allocations, boundaries and constraints published as data.
Then form your own view on weight. An adopted plan approaching a decade old with a stalled replacement is a different proposition from one adopted last year, whatever the policies say.
Reform of this kind moves by statutory instrument and by written ministerial statement rather than by announcement, so follow it through the planning law updates timeline and verify each step against the current published source.
To see which supporting documents a scheme is likely to need under the plan in force now, enter your postcode on PlanScope and work through the guided questions.
This is general guidance, not legal advice, so check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.
Frequently asked questions
What does the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 change about local plans?
It provides for new-style local plans focused on locally specific matters, national development management policies carrying development plan status, gateway checks during preparation, supplementary plans in place of supplementary planning documents, digital data standards, a local plan timetable in place of the local development scheme, and the abolition of the duty to co-operate.
What are gateway assessments in plan making?
Checks at defined points during plan preparation, intended to identify problems capable of making a plan unsound early rather than at examination. The number, timing and consequences of failing one come from regulations and guidance rather than from the face of the Act, so check the current position before relying on any published summary.
Has the duty to co-operate been abolished?
Yes, by the 2023 Act, with an alignment policy expressed in national policy intended to take its place. That converts a legal test applied at examination, where failure was fatal and unfixable, into a policy consideration weighed by an inspector. Cross-boundary arguments move from procedure into the planning merits.
What replaces supplementary planning documents?
Supplementary plans, prepared under a defined procedure that includes consultation and independent examination in specified cases, and carrying development plan status. That gives them more weight than a supplementary planning document ever had, under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, but makes them heavier to produce.
How do I find out which plan making system an authority is in?
Check the adopted plan and its adoption date, the authority's local plan timetable, and whether a replacement plan has been submitted for examination and on what date. That submission date usually determines which system applies under the transitional arrangements, which have been revised more than once.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.