Charles Wright: Ground is already prepared for Sadiq Khan’s new London Plan

Planning policy is rarely out of the news in London, whether it’s a story about the City skyline or “out of character” housing in the suburbs. But the process of drawing up Sadiq Khan’s next  London Plan – the long-term strategy governing what actually gets built, and where – has been happening somewhat under the radar.

That’s all about to change, with City Hall confirming the timetable for the new plan. A “high level” key issues document will be published early next year, consultation on a first draft to the end of 2025, further consultation and the statutory “examination in public” by planning inspectors through 2026, and final ministerial approval in 2027.

When it comes to development, the plan is the main weapon in the Mayor’s arsenal. Borough local plans must conform with it and its policies must be taken into account when councils decide individual planning applications. So what can we expect after Christmas when Khan, working for the first time with a government of his own persuasion, sets out his blueprint’s key themes?

One thing is clear – the new plan will be very different from the current one. Before the mayoral election that plan came under sustained fire from the government and from the property business. Its 113 detailed policies were accused of preventing “thousands of homes” being brought forward, particularly on brownfield sites.

Now, Labour has set out its own proposals for reform, focused on getting more homes built. A mandatory target of 81,000 new homes a year has been set for the city – more than double current annual delivery – along with, most controversially, a more permissive approach to development on the Green Belt.

For many observers, this is a welcome if belated recognition of the reality that there simply isn’t enough brownfield land in the city to meet need. The reforms will allow the construction of new homes on previously-developed “grey belt” within the Green Belt, and even on undeveloped land where boroughs’ delivery is falling significantly short.

Preventing development on Green Belt land, which covers more than a fifth of Greater London’s land area, remains a cause uniting politicians cross-party, as the London Assembly demonstrated last month. But they may already be fighting yesterday’s battle. Khan cannily left of his 2024 manifesto any mention of the Green Belt, paving the way to accepting the anticipated new government’s stance.

To hit that 81,000 target, though, speeding up development on brownfield sites will be vital too. Khan dismissed the previous government’s criticisms of his performance as an election stunt, saying that Covid and wider global economic factors had hit construction and the property markets across the board and his plan could not be held responsible.

But a pre-election government review which found “persuasive evidence” that Khan’s policies, including his 35 per cent affordable homes quotas, were, in difficult times, effectively costing would-be housebuilders too much, struck a chord not only with developers but with some at City Hall too.

Boroughs had been “excessively mechanistic” in applying the plan, critics said, treating “shoulds” as “musts”. With a growing professional consensus that the next plan should focus on “strategic outcomes rather than detailed means of implementation”, Khan’s manifesto conceded that reform was required. And housing secretary Angela Rayner is already, albeit in a comradely way, laying down the law.

The new government’s prescriptions, including a proposed “brownfield passport” strengthening the presumption in favour of building on previously developed sites and a watering down of rules blocking “out of character” schemes, offer opportunities to promote higher density development on larger and smaller sites too. Might we now see the return of Khan’s 2017 target of some 24,500 new homes a year on small sites, which didn’t survive the inspectors’ scrutiny?

With City Hall under government orders to boost its output, tensions also need to be resolved between the Mayor’s focus on genuinely affordable housing and the fact that many remaining brownfield sites are complex and costly to redevelop. The new plan will need to be flexible enough to address viability, which could put pressure on those affordable quotas unless more government cash is forthcoming.

London cannot afford to lose active industrial land either, according to recent studies, while the government also wants appropriate provision to be made for the “modern economy”, from laboratories and logistics facilities to gigafactories.

With hybrid working now the “new normal” and three in four central London offices requiring significant upgrades to meet new energy efficiency standards, according to the London Property Alliance, more clarity on the choice between retrofitting and redeveloping is required. Should the current plan policy prioritising offices in the central commercial area also be relaxed? Or is it time to take a fresh look at the policy requiring the capital to meet all its housing need within its limits, something it has consistently failed to do?

Plenty of questions, then, for the new London Plan. Khan’s direction of travel will be apparent after Christmas. But the holy grail for this new relationship between a Labour Mayor and a Labour government, certainly in the short term, is still likely to be money – money for affordable homes, for transport schemes left dormant by the previous government and more. When it comes to the speedy unlocking of the thousands more homes the city needs, it may well be Rachel Reeves rather than Angela Rayner who holds the key. All eyes on 30 October.

Details of City Hall’s work to date on the next London Plan, including sign-up arrangements to be kept informed or get involved as the work progresses, can be found here.