Edition 01 · England · Founding edition
Nearly half of England’s development land is advertised without planning permission.
ORTELIAS is the UK’s on-market development land intelligence platform. We read more than 4,000 estate agency websites directly to bring the development land advertised on them into one place, for the widest view of the market available. Our mission is to amplify agency reach and bring transparency and choice to the property development sector.
The development land market has no reliable public record of what is for sale. On-Market Land Research is a regular record of that market. ORTELIAS will publish an edition every month. Each quarterly edition will be a larger roundup: the same core figures, tracked over time, plus new features. The editions in between will focus on sector-specific insights.
This first edition focuses on England. The data it contains is a snapshot from 19 August 2026, two days after the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was replaced on 17 August 2026, and reflects ORTELIAS's own index of the market rather than a complete national count.
By Dave RobertsCo-founder and Head of Research, ORTELIASEdited by Georgette AhearneCo-founder, ORTELIAS
Published 15 September 2026 · Data screened 19 August 2026 · Methodology at the end of this report
All four figures measured at 19 August 2026, from ORTELIAS's own index.
01 · The planning position of land on the market
Almost half the development sites on the market in England are advertised without planning permission.
Sellers advertise 5,375 of the 10,823 sites on the market with no planning permission. That is 49.7%, the largest single group. The next largest is the 3,418 sites (31.6%) offered with a full permission, meaning a detailed permission rather than an outline one.
Those 5,375 sites are offered with the planning work still to do. Whoever buys takes on that work, its cost and the risk.
Around a fifth of the market is advertised as under offer: 2,188 of the 10,823 sites. They are counted because an agreed deal can fall through and the site come back to the market. For a buyer looking today, that leaves roughly four fifths of what is listed to act on.
| Offered with | Sites | Share of the market |
|---|---|---|
| No permission | 5,375 | 49.7% |
| Full permission | 3,418 | 31.6% |
| Outline permission | 767 | 7.1% |
| Expired permission | 416 | 3.8% |
| A local plan allocation | 258 | 2.4% |
| Other status | 589 | 5.4% |
Source: ORTELIAS, 19 August 2026.
02 · What permission adds to the asking price
Housing land with a permission is advertised at twice the price an acre.
On residential sites nationally, sellers ask £867,000 an acre with a full permission and £431,000 without. The gap is £436,000 an acre. These are asking prices, on the sites where one is stated. Fewer than half of listings carry a price. The comparison is fair because the sites with permission and the sites without are much the same size, about half an acre each. Housing is the only land type where the two groups are similar in size.
Median asking price per acre by planning position, across all land types.
Across all land types the gap is wider, £338,000 an acre without a permission against £767,000 with one. That figure is less reliable. Price per acre falls as sites get larger. The sites with permission are a different mix of land types from the sites without, with different plot sizes, so part of the gap comes from size and land type rather than from the permission.
| Land type | No permission | Full permission | Uplift | No. of priced sites no / full permission | Median plot size, acres no / full permission |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Housing | £431,000 | £867,000 | +101% | 445 / 851 | 0.52 / 0.50 |
| Commercial | £312,500 | £576,923 | +85% | 42 / 55 | 0.97 / 1.78 |
| Mixed-use | £854,835 | £1,572,250 | +84% | 84 / 52 | 1.00 / 0.50 |
| Industrial | £285,714 | £482,258 | +69% | 26 / 45 | 1.98 / 1.40 |
| Conversion to homes | £424,837 | £502,959 | +18% | 217 / 213 | 1.17 / 0.90 |
Land types are shown only where there are enough priced sites with and without permission to compare. Source: ORTELIAS, 19 August 2026.
By land type, the uplift for a permission runs from 18% on conversion to homes to about double on housing.
“Half the development land on the market in England is advertised before anyone has established what can be built on it. Where housing land already has permission, sellers ask twice as much an acre.”
03 · What sellers ask for an expired permission
Development land sellers ask almost as much for an expired permission as for a live outline permission.
Not every permission on the market is still live. 416 sites are offered with a permission that has expired. Their median asking price is £582,000 an acre. That is 72% more than land with no permission at all. It is within 6% of land with a live outline permission, which approves the development in principle and leaves the detail to a later application.
Asking prices for an expired permission sit far closer to a live one than to no permission at all.
The particulars say the permission has run out. A buyer would have to apply again. Sellers are still asking within 6% of the price of a live outline permission. Does 6% cover the time, the fees and the risk of a fresh application? That is the buyer’s judgement.
04 · How the land is spread across local authorities
Thirteen local authorities hold 19% of the development sites on the market.
At 19 August, we recorded land on the market in 295 of England’s 296 local authorities. The spread between them is very uneven. Thirteen carry more than a hundred sites. 216 carry fewer than forty, and 46 carry fewer than fifteen.
Cornwall carried 336 sites, which is more than any other authority. The thinnest carried three.
| Authority | Sites on the market | No. of priced sites | No permission | Median £/acre | Sites with a planning constraint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cornwall | 336 | 182 | 32.4% | £358,572 | 36.0% |
| North Yorkshire | 248 | 115 | 49.2% | £175,439 | 46.0% |
| Somerset | 213 | 124 | 32.9% | £443,322 | 78.4% |
| Cheshire East | 147 | 79 | 55.8% | £442,905 | 19.0% |
| Herefordshire | 139 | 102 | 43.9% | £140,895 | 51.1% |
| Westmorland and Furness | 138 | 57 | 48.6% | £447,687 | 66.7% |
A planning constraint is any of the eleven national designations we screen against, such as Green Belt, a flood risk zone or a conservation area. Both percentages are shares of all sites on the market in that authority. National park authorities and development corporations are excluded. Source: ORTELIAS, 19 August 2026.
At the other end of the range, a local authority with few sites listed is not necessarily a quiet one. Plenty of land changes hands privately, and larger sites in particular are often sold to a short list of buyers rather than advertised. So a low count here may mean the land in that local authority is being traded out of sight. It may equally mean few sites are getting through planning, or that owners are holding on.
The median asking prices in the table describe the sites listed in each authority on the day, not a going rate for land there. The lowest median of any authority with enough sites to report was in Cheshire West and Chester, at £55,812 an acre. The sites listed there are larger than most, with a median of 3.4 acres, which is the likely explanation, as price per acre falls as sites get larger.
05 · Green Belt land under the new National Planning Policy Framework
Nearly six in ten Green Belt sites on the market were advertised without planning permission when the new Framework took effect.
For the half of the market with no permission, the constraints on the land are what the buyer has to overcome. All 10,823 sites were checked against eleven national maps of planning constraints, from flood zones to conservation areas. Two of the eleven are set aside: agricultural land classification, which applies to almost every site, and air quality management areas, which are usually declared across a whole authority rather than a site. Half the sites screen as carrying at least one of the other nine, and they are spread unevenly. Conservation area is the widest at 2,141 sites. Green Belt is fifth of the seven, at 739.
How far each of the seven designations reaches across the sites on the market.
Each of these can stop a scheme or change what it costs. A flood zone can trigger the sequential test, which asks whether a lower-risk site was available. A nutrient catchment can hold up a permission until mitigation is agreed. It has stalled consents across whole catchments for years. Harm to a conservation area can justify refusal.
England’s planning rules changed on 17 August 2026. A new National Planning Policy Framework took effect that day. We screened the market two days later, so these are the figures it inherited. Green Belt was not the only one of the seven where the rules moved that day. National Landscape, National Park and conservation area policy shifted too, but grey belt is the change this report tracks. Grey belt is Green Belt land that fails to meet the purposes the designation exists to serve, such as preventing sprawl or the merging of towns; it arrived in the Framework in December 2024. Until August 2026, a site could be ruled out of grey belt altogether if it also carried another constraint, such as a heritage or landscape designation. The new Framework removed that bar: a site can now qualify as grey belt even where another constraint might still block the scheme later. More Green Belt land is therefore eligible for grey belt status than it was in July.
That gives one number worth watching. Today 242 of the 739 Green Belt sites on the market carry a full or outline permission. That is 32.7%. A sustained rise would fit with more Green Belt land moving through planning, grey belt included. It cannot separate grey belt from listing turnover, market conditions or changes in our own coverage. It is an indicator, not a test of the policy. Grey belt has been in the Framework since December 2024, so part of any effect is already inside this figure. A share on a base of 739 also moves by more than a point when ten sites change hands, so small movements should not be over-read.
The share with a permission may not move first. An opening like this usually brings speculative listings before it brings permissions. Land gets offered on the argument that it might qualify, before any council has granted anything. So the share with no permission is the earlier signal. A rise there shows the market testing the policy, not the policy delivering. We will report both figures in future editions.
Green Belt land on the market, by the planning position stated in the advertising.
Feature · Consented land against the housing target
The consented land openly for sale in England carries 31,244 homes.
As of 19 August 2026, 31,244 homes is five weeks of what England needs to build to reach 1.5 million homes this Parliament. Set against what the country actually built last year, the same land is about eight weeks.
Around 1,580 sites carry a full permission, for 16,415 homes. Another 408 carry an outline permission, for 14,829 more.
Reaching 1.5 million homes in England over this Parliament implies about 349,000 net additions a year from here. England added 208,600 net dwellings in the year to March 2025. The 16,415 homes on sites with a full permission alone are about four weeks of that actual rate, on their own.
This comparison carries limits. The 31,244 is a stock counted on one day. The 349,000 needed each year is a rate, so this is not a countdown. It is not the national pipeline either: land already owned, optioned, held as strategic land or in public hands is never advertised, so none of it is here. The unit counts are the scheme totals sellers advertise, while the national figures net off demolitions. Even so, it still matters because it shows how much land is genuinely open to buy, not a modelled projection.
What to take from this edition
- Almost half the development land for sale is advertised without planning permission.
5,375 of the 10,823 sites on the market.
- Sellers ask about twice as much an acre for housing land that comes with a permission.
On residential sites nationally, £867,000 an acre with a full permission against £431,000 without. The gap is £436,000 an acre.
- Development land sellers ask almost as much for an expired permission as for a live outline permission.
Land with an expired permission asks £582,000 an acre. Land with a live outline permission asks £615,000, only 6% more. Land with no permission at all asks £338,000.
- Thirteen local authorities hold 19% of the development sites on the market.
Cornwall carries the most, 336 sites. Many authorities carry only a handful.
- Nearly six in ten Green Belt sites on the market are advertised without planning permission.
Of the 739 Green Belt sites on the market, 431 are advertised without a permission and 242 carry a full or outline one. England's Green Belt planning rules changed on 17 August 2026, just two days before this snapshot was taken.
- Consented land currently on the market is about 9% of what England needs to build in a year.
31,244 homes across roughly 2,000 sites, of which 16,415 already carry a full planning permission.
Subscribe
We use the same definitions and the same screening every time, so the numbers stay comparable, and every edition brings new analysis and features. Add your email and we will send you edition 02 in October, and every edition after that.
The two are separate lists. Unsubscribe at any time.
Development Land Intelligence
ORTELIAS finds the sites that fit your brief.
It monitors more than 4,000 UK agency websites directly. The result is the widest view of the UK’s on-market development land inventory available. Describe the site you are looking for in your own words, and every result comes back ranked against that brief, with a written assessment of what it offers and what the listing does not say.
See ORTELIASHow this was measured
- What these numbers describe, and what they do not
- Every figure in this edition counts land advertised on the agency websites ORTELIAS monitors, as it stood on 19 August 2026. Within the index every figure is calculated the same way every time, under the rules set out below. They are what the particulars said on the day, counted and classified by us.
This is not a census of the English land market. We monitor more than 4,000 agency websites and add to that list continuously, aiming to read every agency advertising development land in England. We are not there yet, and because no reliable published total exists, we cannot say how far short we are. If our coverage is thinner in one region than another, the shares in this edition would move, and there is no external total against which to test it. This is the largest limitation on everything published here. We read agency websites directly rather than waiting for listings to be supplied, so every count here is a floor rather than a total: land advertised through an agency we do not yet read is simply absent from these figures, not evidence that it does not exist. That is why no local authority is ever described here as having no land for sale, and why "of the market" means the market as we observe it. Even so, this remains the widest view of the market available, which is why we publish it.
If you advertise development land and would like to ensure we are reading your website, please contact us at [email protected] - Scope
- England only. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that we reference in this edition applies to England. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland operate separate frameworks, and no claim here extends to them.
- Source
- ORTELIAS's own index of land and commercial property marketed for sale, screened against eleven national constraint datasets. Snapshot taken 19 August 2026, two days after the Framework was replaced on 17 August 2026.
- Qualifying definition
- A record counts if it is on the market, meaning available or under offer. On 19 August 2026 we indexed 12,233 English listings in total; 1,410 are excluded as sold (1,262), let (63), withdrawn (43) or unclassified (42). Under offer is included because an agreed deal can return to the market; those sites number 2,188 of 10,823, or 20.2%.
- We count what is advertised, not planning registers
- Where the particulars do not carry a permission, what we have recorded is that the site is being offered without one. We have not looked these sites up on a local authority register. Every planning figure in this edition describes what is on offer, not what a register holds.
- We do not report authorities as having no land
- Absence from our index is not evidence of absence from the market, so no local authority is described here as having nothing for sale, and the figures in section 04 describe the distribution of what we track rather than the presence or absence of a market anywhere. National park authorities and development corporations are not treated as local authorities for this purpose.
- Constraint screening is at postcode precision for a large share of sites
- Many coordinates resolve to a postcode centroid rather than a site boundary. A Green Belt boundary can run through a postcode. Throughout this report a site therefore screens as a designation rather than sitting in it, and the wording is deliberate.
- What the housing comparison rests on
- Housing is the only land type where the consented and unconsented sites are about the same size, 0.50 acres against 0.52, so it is the only row where the ratio is not partly measuring size. In every other type the sites on one side are materially larger. Every figure is an asking price, never an achieved sale, and a gap between two groups of sites does not on its own show that the permission created it. Site size is the only variable held the same. Location is not: owners apply for permission where the uplift justifies the cost, so consented and unconsented sites of the same size may sit in places of different underlying value, and part of the gap will be geography rather than planning.
- Homes on sites with planning permission
- 16,415 homes across about 1,580 residential sites advertised with full planning permission. Unit counts are taken from the particulars and none is checked against a local authority register, so the figure describes homes advertised with a full planning permission. The index sometimes holds one site twice, where two agencies market it or one agency lists it twice. Counting every listing gives 16,762; treating as one site those listings identical on postcode, size, price and unit count gives 16,415; a looser matching rule gives 15,757. The middle figure is quoted and the range is stated because the choice of rule moves it by 6%. The same counting rule was run on the outline sites: it removes 11 listings carrying 75 units, leaving 14,829 homes across 408 sites. The combined figure of 31,244 therefore applies one rule to both halves. Comparator: 208,600 net additional dwellings, England, 2024-25, published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government under the Open Government Licence. A stock of land for sale on one day and a year of completed supply are different measures; expressing the first as weeks of the second shows scale and is not a claim about how long the land would last.
- Site size is the strongest single influence on price per acre
- Cheshire West and Chester records the lowest median we hold, and its priced sites are larger than in most other authorities, which is the reason. The land-type table earlier in this edition shows the same effect at the site-type level: where the consented and unconsented groups being compared are different sizes, the ratio between them partly measures size rather than permission.
- Price per acre
- Recorded on 4,852 of the 10,823 sites on the market, or 44.8%. Every price figure is an asking price, never an achieved sale price, and medians are used throughout because a handful of very expensive sites would otherwise drag a simple average upward, away from what a typical site actually costs. Where the particulars state a per-acre figure it is recorded as advertised; otherwise it is calculated from the asking price and the site area. Nominal prices are excluded from every price figure.
- Price per acre is one unit among several
- Development land is also valued per plot and against gross development value, and those units can rank sites differently. Price per acre is used here because it is recorded consistently across the index. It carries the size of the parcel with it, so a large cheap parcel and a small expensive one are not being compared on equal terms. This bears most heavily on the authority table.
- The land type comparison
- Land type is ORTELIAS's own classification of what a site is being marketed for. Categories are shown only where at least 25 sites carry a price per acre on both sides, and categories are excluded where the two sides differ by more than three times in median area. How a site is described is strongly associated with whether an application exists, so it is reported but not corrected for, and the report gives a range across descriptors rather than one adjusted figure.
- Why national parks and development corporations are excluded
- England has 296 principal councils, excluding county councils. They decide most planning applications and they are the geography this edition counts by. National park authorities and development corporations are planning authorities in their own right, but they cover small and unusual areas where development is tightly restricted. Including them would distort the distribution. They are excluded and counted nowhere.
- Authority tables
- Coverage is national rather than sampled. At 19 August, we recorded land on the market in 295 local authorities. 249 carry fifteen or more sites and 79 carry forty or more. Forty is the floor for any authority shown with statistics. We set that threshold before we looked at the results, so it was not chosen to include or exclude any particular authority. Median price per acre is shown only where at least ten sites in that authority carry one. Authority names follow the current unitary structure as recorded in our index. Cheshire West and Chester at £55,812 an acre is the lowest median we record among the authorities clearing the reporting floor, and site size is the explanation: the median plot there is 3.40 acres, larger than the typical priced site elsewhere. It is not a statement that land in Cheshire is cheap.
- What counts as designated
- The authority table excludes two of the eleven screened datasets. Agricultural land classification applies to 99.7% of listings and distinguishes nothing. Air quality management areas are frequently declared authority-wide, which makes them a measure of jurisdiction rather than site. Excluding both gives 50%, which is the figure we would defend.
- Biodiversity Net Gain is not screened
- Biodiversity Net Gain has been mandatory in England since 12 February 2024 for major development and 2 April 2024 for small sites, and it bears directly on how much of a site is developable. Applications made from 6 August 2026 on sites of 0.2 hectares or less are exempt, unless the development affects a priority habitat on the site. It is not one of the eleven datasets screened here and nothing in this edition measures it. That is a gap in the constraint picture, not a judgement that it does not matter.
- No trend claims
- Collection began on 29 March 2026, so we hold just under five months. Any statement here about change over time would be unsupported, and therefore none is made in this edition.
- The housing target comparison
- Pledge: Labour manifesto 2024, 1.5 million net additional dwellings in England over this Parliament, confirmed England-only by the Housing Minister in October 2024. Net additional dwellings, 2024-25: MHCLG, Housing supply, England, 208,600. Progress to 14 June 2026: 392,400 net additional dwellings, MHCLG’s own cumulative estimate, published in its Housing supply: indicators of new supply, England: January to March 2026 release (19 June 2026). The prior quarterly release put the cumulative total at 342,100 net additional dwellings from 9 July 2024 to 15 March 2026. Both figures are MHCLG’s own, from consecutive releases; Full Fact’s tracker reports the more recent one rather than calculating its own. Ministers have not set annual interim targets, so the implied rate and the gap are ORTELIAS calculations from the published figures and are not government projections. The pledge is 1,500,000 net additional dwellings in England over this Parliament. That leaves 1,107,600 against the pledge. The rate divides that 1,107,600 by the 3.17 years from 14 June 2026 to 16 August 2029: this Parliament dissolves automatically on 9 July 2029, five years after it first met; the 25th working day after that is 13 August 2029, and 16 August, the following Thursday, is used here as the conventional polling day. That is about 140,000 a year above the 208,600 England added in 2024-25. Net additional dwellings are published under the Open Government Licence.
Using these figures. This edition is published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0). You may quote, chart, adapt and reproduce the figures, including commercially. Credit ORTELIAS On-Market Land Research, Edition 01, September 2026, and link to ortelias.com/research where the format allows. The licence does not cover the ORTELIAS name or logo. If you would like the underlying figures behind a chart, please write to [email protected].
ORTELIAS is a trading name of Hawkeye Land Limited, registered in England and Wales, company number 12262268, registered office 1-2 Rhodium Point, Spindle Close, Hawkinge, Folkestone, Kent CT18 7TQ.
This edition is market research published for general information. ORTELIAS is an aggregator of marketed listings and is not a land, planning, valuation or investment adviser. Nothing here is advice, and no decision on any site should be taken on the strength of it without your own professional advice and your own checks against the relevant planning register.