Worked example. Isolated is the most consequential word on the form. With no houses nearby, every ordinary route disappears and five narrow circumstances are all that remain. The design route asks for truly outstanding architecture by national standards. Change the site to sit within a group of houses and watch the ordinary routes come back.

Policy test

Number of homes and site area

Settles the major threshold and feeds the density calculation. The L3(2)(c) floor is measured over the net developable area, which on a small site is normally the whole site, so the site area is used.

HomesSite area (ha)

Minor development on these figures: under 10 homes and under 0.5 hectares.

Where does the site sit?

Decides which policy family applies. The council's policies map shows settlement boundaries and Green Belt.

Isolated homes in the countryside: HO11

S5(3) removes isolated homes from the S5 list, so HO11 is the only route. One or more of the five limbs must apply.

An essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work, including someone taking majority control of a farm businessAppropriate enabling development to secure the future of a heritage asset, under HE4Reuse of a redundant or disused building, enhancing its immediate setting, including securing the long-term reuse of a vacant or underused listed buildingSubdivision of an existing residential buildingExceptional quality design: truly outstanding, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, helping raise standards more generally in rural areas, and significantly enhancing its immediate settingJudgement call

What kind of housing is proposed?

Open market housingSelf-build or custom build plotsA single self-build dwellingAffordable-led, or a rural exception siteCommunity-led developmentOlder persons or specialist accommodationMixed use including residentialUnder a Community Right to Build Order or Neighbourhood Development Order

Evidenced unmet need

Unmet need is not defined, but it must be evidenced. Inside the Green Belt, footnote 41 narrows it to the two supply measures. Annex A(3) closes one argument outside it: where the council has a five year supply and a Housing Delivery Test result above 75%, a standard method figure higher than the adopted plan requirement does not count as unmet need for five years from adoption.

No five year supply of deliverable housing sitesHousing Delivery Test result below 75%Evidenced unmet affordable housing needOther evidenced unmet need: older persons, specialist, rural, or self-build and custom buildNeed is met on every measure

Relationship to the settlement, and infrastructure capacity

Two separate requirements, and both are judgement calls with no defined test.

Physically well-related to the settlement or a stationJudgement callOf a scale existing or proposed infrastructure can accommodateJudgement callAdjoins the settlement edgeSits beyond the far edge of an undeveloped allocation

Is the site within reasonable walking distance of a station?

Reasonable walking distance is around 800 metres. Where topography, poor routes or a physical barrier would put that walk off, around 10 minutes' actual walking time is used instead. Where only part of the site is within reach, the station limbs and the density floor apply only to that part.

No station within reasonable walking distanceYes, the whole site is within 800 metresYes, but only part of the siteWithin a 10 minute walk, with barriers applying

Design quality

DP3 attaches weight to design quality generally, and is not confined to isolated sites. Separate from the HO11(1)(e) route.

Outstanding or innovative design which promotes high sustainability or raises design standards in the areaWould improve the energy efficiency of an existing building, or draw on district heat, renewable or low carbon sources

Which heritage assets would the proposal affect, including through development within their setting?

Record every asset affected: they attract different policies and can take different levels of harm. Where more than one asset of the same type is affected, assess the one that would take the greatest effect.

Add a heritage asset

No heritage asset affected, and none in the setting

S5(3) to HO11

HO11 is the only route, and it is in play.

S5(3) removes isolated homes from the S5 list altogether. None of the other limbs is available, however attractive the site.

03Principle of development

Every limb tested in parallel. They are alternatives, not a hierarchy.

HO11

Isolated homes in the countryside

Arguable

The site is isolated: lying outside any settlement or group of houses. S5(3) then removes it from the S5 list entirelyS5(3)Met
An essential need for a rural worker, including someone taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countrysideHO11(1)(a)N/A
Appropriate enabling development to secure the future of a heritage asset, in accordance with HE4HO11(1)(b)N/A
Reuse of a redundant or disused building which would enhance its immediate setting, including securing the long-term reuse of a vacant or underused listed buildingHO11(1)(c)N/A
Subdivision of an existing residential buildingHO11(1)(d)N/A
Exceptional quality design: truly outstanding, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas, and significantly enhancing its immediate setting while being sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local areaHO11(1)(e)Matter of judgement
At least one limb is relied on. HO11(1) requires one or more to applyHO11(1)Met

04Things that could stop it

Nothing on this list applies on the answers so far. Worth checking again once the survey work is done, because flooding, access and density often only show up at that stage.

05Weight ledger

Only the things national policy says must be taken into account, and only as strongly as the answers support.

Consideration	Policy	Weight
Homes contributing to evidenced accommodation needscheckHO7(1) requires the homes to contribute to accommodation needs evidenced through the authority's needs assessments. Answer the unmet need question before relying on this.	HO7(1)	Not established
Outstanding or innovative designDP3(5) directs substantial weight to outstanding or innovative designs which promote high levels of sustainability or help raise the standard of design in the area, so long as they are consistent with the overall form and layout of their surroundings.	DP3(5)	Substantial
Any development plan policy materially inconsistent with this FrameworkcheckThis is a prompt, not a finding: the tool cannot read your development plan. Identify the specific policies and the specific inconsistency. Two exceptions: policies examined and adopted or made against this Framework keep their weight, and a policy is not downgraded simply for predating the Framework. Most restrictive rural housing policies adopted under earlier editions now sit here.	Annex A(2)	Very limited

06Interpretation register

Undefined language this case would turn on.

“substantially outweighed”S4, S5, GB7: Undefined, and the whole balance turns on it. Materially higher than the old significantly and demonstrably formulation, with nothing in the Framework saying how much higher.
“settlement”Annex B: The Framework points to development plan definitions. Where the plan draws no boundary, the extent is argued from what is predominantly built-up. Land allocated or permitted that will form part of the built-up area counts too. Villages lying within and defined as part of the Green Belt are excluded entirely.
“evidenced unmet need”S5(1)(j) against GB7(1)(g)(ii): The same phrase is open in one place and closed in the other, and for small and self-build sites that is the most important asymmetry in the document. S5(1)(j) says including, but not limited to, a five year supply failure: any evidenced need can count. Footnote 41 to GB7(1)(g)(ii) says that for housing it means a five year supply shortfall including any buffer, or a Housing Delivery Test result below 75%: on a strict reading nothing else counts. At appeal, inspectors have counted self-build demand under the closed version too, so far always alongside a five year supply shortfall, so whether it can satisfy the test alone is undecided. Annex A(3) adds one limit on the open version: where the authority has a five year supply and a Housing Delivery Test result above 75%, a standard method figure higher than the adopted requirement is not evidence of unmet need for five years from adoption.
“people wishing to commission or build their own homes”HO1(2)(i): This is how self-build demand becomes an assessed need, which is what earns the substantial weight at HO7. Where the council's evidence has never assessed it, that gap is itself the argument.
“truly outstanding”HO11(1)(e): The exceptional quality design route for an isolated one-off, and the only limb in the housing policies that turns on architecture rather than location.
“very limited weight”Annex A(2): What a development plan policy materially inconsistent with the national decision-making policies now gets, unless the plan was examined and adopted or made against this Framework. Not zero: how little is for the decision-maker, case by case. A policy is not downgraded simply for predating the Framework; the inconsistency has to be shown. Most restrictive rural housing policies adopted under earlier editions sit here.

07The policies behind the numbers

S4: Principle of development within settlements
S5: Principle of development outside settlements
HO1: Assessing the need for homes
HO7: Meeting the need for homes
HO11: Isolated homes in the countryside
GB7: Development which is not inappropriate in the Green Belt
DP3: Key principles for well-designed places

Assessed against the National Planning Policy Framework (2026), published 17 August 2026, using ruleset 1.1.0 and interpretation revision 2026-08-18.

This is a policy test, not a site assessment

Everything above comes from the answers on the left. It has not looked at a map, a local plan, or the planning history of any particular site, and it is not planning advice. If you have a real piece of land, the assessment starts from its boundary instead, and fills in what it can from the data.

Assess an actual site