Last month marked a big shift in the UK’s Planning, Development, and Regeneration space.
Mayor of London Sadiq Khan announced the consultation for the new London Plan, and for the first time, he said that the green belt land could be up for development. That’s a huge deal. The green belt has long been seen as untouchable, and changing that could unlock serious progress on London’s housing crisis.
The Current Situation
Housing delivery in London has been underwhelming for the last decade, with only 30,000 to 45,000 new homes built per year. This persistent shortfall helped fuel some of the city’s biggest challenges: overcrowding, growing homelessness, and unaffordable rents.
Now, the new London Plan is aiming big, setting an average target of 88,000 homes per year, or 880,000 over the next decade.
It’s a dramatic leap. So, what’s going to be done differently? How does the Mayor plan to more than double the housing delivery rate in the capital?
Understanding the Green Belt
The green belt has become all things to all people: a symbol of nature, nostalgia, and environmental protection. But really? It was introduced after WWII as a planning boundary to prevent urban sprawl, particularly around Birmingham.
Contrary to popular belief, the green belt isn’t just made up of valuable agricultural land or idyllic countryside worth protecting. Much of it is unused plots or former industrial and unsightly sites. And unlike the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), it has no special environmental status.
In fact, in FY21-22, the green belt grew by 1.5%, while our housing stock only grew by 0.93%. So while we’re in a housing crisis, we’ve been adding more green belt land than actual homes.
Why Khan’s Change Matters
For years, the Mayor and the Greater London Authority (GLA) held firm on keeping the green belt off-limits. But now, into his 3rd term, Khan appears to be shifting his stance.
This can be seen as a response to pressure, especially from the Central Government. When Michael Gove was Housing Secretary, he publicly called Khan out for blocking development and refusing the green belt to be released.
Here’s what Gove said in 2023:
"Not only is delivery considerably short of your own London Plan target by approximately 15,000 homes per year, it was approximately 63,500 homes lower than actual need last year..."
"This is not a national issue. London was the worst performing region in the Housing Delivery Test 2022. Fewer than half of the London Boroughs and Development Corporations delivered more than 95% of their appropriate housing requirement.."
"Areas like the West Midlands are overdelivering, while London continues to fall short."
So, whether it’s political pressure or a change in perspective, Khan’s move signals an end to over 75 years of de facto policy that outright refused to allow our capital and its role as the country’s most productive city to grow.
Rethinking the Green Belt
Khan now echoes what others have been saying for a while: that London’s green belt is mostly low quality and is placed close to existing transport infrastructure like tube stations, train stations, and bus routes.
Take Tottenham, for example. Amid new housing developments, you’ll still find derelict buildings and a run-down petrol station, protected from redevelopment simply because of a green belt label.
Opening up even a small portion of the green belt could make a big difference. It’s not about paving over nature. It’s about being strategic and realistic given the current housing situation.
Will it Work?
Plenty of activists and politicians disagree. In the wake of the announcement, a Green Party MP was calling for rent controls instead of green belt development.
But cities that have increased housing supply show a clear correlation between increasing housing stock and decreasing housing costs and homelessness.
For instance, Austin, Texas, has seen rents fall for nearly two years after a building boom, approving nearly three times more units per 1,000 residents than nearby cities. Meanwhile, Auckland, New Zealand, changed zoning rules, allowing more units and leading to rent drops that save the average renter over $3,000 a year.
On the flip side, rent controls are often counterproductive. When Buenos Aires repealed them, rental availability jumped by 140% and prices fell by 40%.
The bottom line is: this data shows more homes means better affordability.
Final Thoughts
John Maynard Keynes once said, “When the facts change, I change my mind.” Perhaps Khan has done just that, changing his mind as new evidence and pressures emerge. Or maybe it’s a political move to bring himself more in line with the overarching strategy from the Central Government.
Either way, looking at data from other cities, it’s a positive change.
Curious about how changes like this affect the property, housing, or architecture space? We’re here to help. Drop us a line at info@oysterpartnership.com, we’d love to chat.