7 Aug 2026
Permitted Development Rights Changes: June–August 2026 Proposals Explained
Permitted Development Rights Changes: What the June-August 2026 Proposals Mean for Projects
The government has consulted on a new set of permitted development rights changes in England. The proposals cover schools affected by RAAC, assets of community value, closed defence sites and environmental conservation works. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) consultation ran from 10 June to 5 August 2026. Responses are now being analysed.
While the proposals are technical, their implications could be significant for the built environment. Permitted development rights can determine whether work requires a full planning application or can proceed through a simpler planning route. For developers, landowners, local authorities and public bodies, the proposed changes could therefore affect programme timescales, planning risk and early site strategy.
What permitted development rights changes are being proposed?
The consultation covers four areas of the planning system:
- Temporary buildings at schools affected by reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC),
- Demolition of assets of community value,
- Crown development on closed defence sites,
- Conservation works delivered through Environmental Delivery Plans.
Each proposal deals with a different planning challenge. However, they each aim to review where greater planning flexibility is appropriate and where additional scrutiny may be needed.
Extending permitted development rights for RAAC schools
It has been proposed to extend the temporary permitted development right for schools affected by RAAC. The existing right allows temporary buildings to be provided on affected school sites without a full planning application, subject to specific conditions. This is currently due to expire on 24 October 2026. Under the proposal, this would be extended for two years to 24 October 2028.
Some schools are unlikely to complete their RAAC remediation programmes before the existing right expires. Extending the deadline would give affected schools more flexibility to keep temporary teaching spaces in place while permanent works continue, helping education estate teams manage programme and planning risk where temporary accommodation is still required.
Greater planning protection for assets of community value
MHCLG also proposes to remove assets of community value (ACVs) from the permitted development right that currently allows certain buildings to be demolished. Future sporting assets of community value would also be covered. If introduced, owners would need to apply for planning permission before demolishing these assets, giving local planning authorities greater scope to consider the impact on the surrounding community.
This could be particularly relevant to community buildings, sports facilities and other locally important assets. For developers and landowners, ACV status may therefore become a more important part of early site due diligence, with potential implications for demolition strategies, redevelopment programmes and planning timescales.
Changes to permitted development rights on closed defence sites
The consultation also explores greater planning flexibility for Crown development on closed defence sites. Current permitted development rights already allow certain buildings, extensions and alterations on these sites. However, existing restrictions can prevent relatively low-impact projects from using the permitted development route. The proposals include changes to floorspace limits, prior approval thresholds and restrictions close to site boundaries. They also consider allowing some new buildings to reach 18 metres in height where they are more than 25 metres from the site perimeter. In addition, MHCLG proposes changing definitions so sites and buildings used “wholly or mainly” for defence purposes could qualify.
The intention is to allow the Ministry of Defence to make more efficient use of its estate and reduce unnecessary planning delays. The proposals do not remove planning controls altogether. Restrictions relating to areas such as protected landscapes, listed buildings, contamination and flood risk would remain.
How do Environmental Delivery Plans fit into the proposals?
The fourth area could have wider implications for housing and infrastructure delivery, relating to Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs) and the Nature Restoration Fund.
Environmental Delivery Plans are designed to take a more strategic approach to environmental impacts from development. Natural England would identify conservation measures needed to address specific impacts on protected sites or species. Instead of addressing every impact solely at individual development level, conservation measures could be planned and delivered across a wider area. Some of those measures may themselves count as development and require planning permission. Examples could include:
- creating or restoring ponds
- carrying out habitat creation works
- reducing pollution or disturbance
- erecting small structures for protected species
- maintaining conservation sites
The government is therefore considering new permitted development rights for specified conservation works delivered by Natural England, or operators working on its behalf. The aim is to provide greater certainty and allow agreed environmental measures to be implemented more efficiently.
What could Environmental Delivery Plans mean for developers?
This part of the consultation is particularly relevant to developers involved in housing and infrastructure. Under the emerging system, developers could make payments into the Nature Restoration Fund where an Environmental Delivery Plan addresses specified environmental impacts. Natural England could then use pooled funding to deliver conservation measures at a wider scale.
For project teams, this means environmental delivery could become more closely connected to strategic planning at an earlier stage. Understanding whether a site falls within an Environmental Delivery Plan could therefore become an important part of due diligence and may influence environmental obligations, project costs and programme assumptions. It will also be important to understand which conservation measures benefit from permitted development rights and which still require planning permission or prior approval.
Why do the permitted development rights changes matter?
Taken together, the proposals show how permitted development rights are being used in different ways across the planning system. For RAAC schools and defence sites, the government is considering additional flexibility to support faster delivery. For assets of community value, the direction is towards greater planning scrutiny.
Environmental Delivery Plans sit somewhere different again. Here, permitted development could help deliver the conservation work needed to support a wider strategic approach to development and nature recovery. For built environment clients, there are several practical points to consider.
Developers and landowners should check whether community asset designations or Environmental Delivery Plans could affect a site before relying on existing planning assumptions. Local authorities may need close coordination between planning, estates, ecology and community teams as the proposals develop. Public estate managers should consider whether changes to permitted development rights could affect planned works, temporary accommodation or longer-term estate strategies. Project teams should avoid assuming that a permitted development route available today will remain unchanged throughout a project’s lifecycle.
What happens next?
The consultation closed on 5 August 2026, and MHCLG is now analysing the responses. The proposals have therefore not automatically become planning law. The final approach may change following consultation before any amendments to permitted development rights take effect.
However, clients with projects involving public estates, community assets, defence land or significant environmental obligations should consider these issues during early feasibility and planning reviews.
At Cannon Clarke Group, we work with clients to understand planning constraints alongside design, technical and environmental considerations from the earliest stages of a project. Early assessment can help identify potential risks before they begin to affect design decisions, planning strategy or programme.
If you are considering a project and would like to discuss the planning or design considerations at an early stage, our team would be happy to help.
