BLOGS

A new era for regional planning

The English Devolution Bill marks a significant shift in how large-scale housing developments could be approved across England. Under the proposed legislation, elected mayors in combined authority areas would gain strategic planning powers comparable to those held by the Mayor of London since 2000. The aim is clear: streamline major housing decisions, reduce delays, and accelerate the delivery of new homes in areas that need them most.

For investors, developers, and lenders tracking the residential pipeline, this represents both opportunity and uncertainty. The powers could unlock faster approvals for strategic sites, but the transition raises questions about Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) implementation, local authority relationships, and the practical mechanics of shifting planning responsibility upward.

Where decision times diverge

REalyse planning data reveals substantial variation in how quickly major residential schemes (10+ units) move through the planning system across combined authority areas. The West Midlands currently processes decisions fastest, with an average of approximately 9 months from submission to determination. Greater Manchester and London follow closely at around 10 months. However, Liverpool City Region trails significantly, with average decision times exceeding 16 months for comparable schemes.

Approval rates tell a more consistent story. Across all six major metro mayor areas, approval rates for large residential schemes cluster between 87% and 91%. Greater Manchester leads with approximately 91% of decided applications receiving consent, while Liverpool City Region sits at roughly 87%. This narrow band suggests that outcomes are relatively predictable—it is the journey to that outcome that varies dramatically.

These disparities matter. A seven-month difference in decision time can fundamentally alter development viability. Holding costs accumulate. Market conditions shift. For build-to-rent investors and institutional capital targeting regional cities, predictability of timeline is often as important as the approval itself.

The London model under the microscope

London's strategic planning framework offers the clearest precedent for what mayors elsewhere might inherit. The capital has processed over 3,400 major residential applications in recent years, with consent granted for schemes totalling more than 425,000 proposed units. The Mayor's call-in powers and the London Plan provide a strategic overlay that, in theory, ensures large developments align with broader housing and infrastructure objectives.

Yet London's system is not without criticism. The 10-month average decision time for major schemes, while respectable, still falls short of government targets for strategic applications. Coordination between the Greater London Authority and 32 borough councils remains complex. The question for other combined authorities is whether adopting similar powers will genuinely accelerate delivery or simply shift bottlenecks from local to regional level.

Infrastructure levy risks

Perhaps the most significant concern surrounding the devolution of planning powers centres on infrastructure funding. The Community Infrastructure Levy, which captures value from development to fund local roads, schools, and amenities, is currently administered at local authority level. If mayors gain planning authority for strategic sites, the distribution of CIL receipts becomes considerably more complicated.

Local councils may resist ceding control over developments that generate substantial infrastructure contributions. Developers, meanwhile, face potential uncertainty over who collects what—and when. The bill's drafters will need to address these mechanics carefully. A poorly designed funding framework could create friction that delays the very schemes the powers are meant to accelerate.

There is also the broader question of capacity. Mayoral combined authorities currently lack the planning officers, legal teams, and technical expertise to process major applications at scale. Building that capacity takes time and money. Early implementation may therefore see a period of adjustment before any efficiency gains materialise.

Regional pipeline implications

For those analysing the residential development pipeline, the data points to where mayoral planning powers could have the greatest impact. Areas with high application volumes but slower decision times—Liverpool City Region being the clearest example—stand to benefit most from streamlined strategic oversight. Conversely, the West Midlands, already operating efficiently, may see marginal gains at best.

REalyse data shows the pipeline across these six combined authority areas encompasses nearly one million proposed residential units in various stages of the planning process. Even modest improvements in conversion rates or decision timelines could translate to tens of thousands of additional homes reaching the market over the coming decade.

Investors should watch for early signals of how individual mayors intend to use these powers. Some may prioritise brownfield regeneration and urban densification. Others may take a more permissive approach to greenfield strategic sites. The political composition of mayoral offices will inevitably influence both policy priorities and developer relationships.

Looking ahead

The English Devolution Bill represents the most significant reform to planning governance outside London in a generation. If implemented effectively, it could address one of the persistent obstacles to housing delivery: the fragmentation of decision-making across dozens of local planning authorities, each with different priorities, capacities, and political pressures.

But reform is not the same as improvement. The success of these new powers will depend on adequate resourcing, clear infrastructure funding arrangements, and constructive relationships between mayors and local councils. The data suggests the prize is worth pursuing—regional cities with streamlined planning could close the efficiency gap with the West Midlands benchmark and unlock substantial housing delivery.

For developers, lenders, and investors, the message is to monitor implementation closely. The areas that adapt quickest to the new framework will likely see capital flow toward their pipelines. Those that struggle with transition may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage in an increasingly sophisticated residential investment market.