The Greater London Authority’s consultation document “Towards a New London Plan” sets out an ambitious direction for shaping the capital’s growth up to 2050. While it spans a wide range of spatial, economic, and environmental themes, this summary focuses on the implications for residential development, both in terms of delivery mechanisms and the kinds of sites and housing typologies that may come to the forefront.
From renewed emphasis on small sites and infill housing, to proposals around green belt review, tall buildings, co-living, PBSA and demographic-specific housing, the Plan proposes structural changes that could significantly influence how and where new homes are delivered across London.
The Plan confirms a step change in housing delivery is needed, with an indicative target of 88,000 homes per year. While brownfield land remains the first priority, the document openly acknowledges that this supply will be insufficient on its own.
A strategic review of the Green Belt, including the identification of so-called “grey belt” land, signals a potential shift in long-standing policy. Sites of limited environmental, recreational or visual value, particularly those well connected to public transport, could be brought into the development pipeline. If accompanied by clear criteria for accessibility, biodiversity and design quality, this could unlock land that is currently difficult to plan positively for.
The consultation places considerable emphasis on small sites as a source of housing growth, particularly in established neighbourhoods with fragmented land ownership. Policy tools under consideration include:
While these tools could bring consistency and reduce planning risk, they are also likely to raise the design and technical threshold for small schemes. Intensification will no longer be a matter of numbers alone, but of demonstrating contextual quality, sustainability and street-based logic, which could present new challenges for less-experienced developers.
While small sites feature prominently, the consultation also considers how to support larger schemes, both through increased densities in accessible locations and urban extensions where infrastructure is strong.
The possibility of defining height thresholds and tall building clusters at the London-wide level could introduce much-needed predictability into the planning process. However, many developers are now deliberately capping schemes under 18 metres to avoid the time, cost and complexity of the Building Safety Regulator’s Gateway process. Unless addressed, this could act as a structural constraint on the Plan’s ambitions to optimise density and housing numbers through mid-rise and high-rise forms.
The Plan acknowledges the evolving nature of housing need, particularly:
Strategic coordination of capacity for PBSA and co-living may help balance infrastructure demands and avoid overconcentration. However, it will be important to ensure that any London-wide thresholds remain flexible enough to respond to site-specific context and local need. These typologies often bring forward underused land and provide housing formats that complement, rather than compete with, mainstream tenure mixes.
The paper suggests refining how transport accessibility is measured, moving beyond the current PTAL model to include journey times, service frequency, and active travel networks. This could lead to more nuanced assessments of which areas are suitable for increased height or density.
Such an approach would align well with typology-based planning, especially where smaller or edge-of-centre sites currently sit outside conventional growth areas but are in practice well connected.
Alongside housing delivery, the Plan outlines several principles intended to align development with London’s climate goals, including:
These ambitions will require a careful balance, particularly on constrained sites and where delivering compact housing typologies must be reconciled with occupant comfort, urban heat risk and energy performance.
The proposals outlined in Towards a New London Plan reflect a pragmatic acknowledgement of the barriers and opportunities shaping residential development in London. The emerging themes — strategic land reviews, typology-based design codes, specialist accommodation, and better alignment of density with transport — suggest a more spatially intelligent and delivery-aware framework.
What will matter most is how these ideas are implemented. Their success will depend on:
With a portfolio spanning large-scale PBSA and co-living developments, traditional housing schemes on the urban edge, and highly constrained infill projects within conservation areas, BB Partnership is well positioned to respond to the emerging policy direction. Our Certified Passive House design capabilities will become increasingly relevant as the Plan evolves toward tighter energy performance standards, climate resilience and retrofit ambitions, whatever final form the next London Plan may take.
BA [Hons], Dip Arc, RIBA
Director
BA [Hons], Dip Arc, RIBA
Director
BA [Hons], Dip Arc, RIBA
Director