BLOGS

A new layer of planning authority is emerging

England's planning system is heading into its most significant restructuring since regional spatial strategies were abolished in 2010. Following the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026, elected mayors across England are set to gain call-in powers over strategically important housing schemes — powers modelled on those the Mayor of London has held since 2000. The government has proposed national thresholds outside London of schemes above 150 homes, more than 15,000 sqm of commercial space, or buildings over 30 metres in height, while London itself is consulting on lowering its own threshold from 150 to 50 homes.

Housing secretary proposals reported in late 2025 go further still: local planning authorities minded to refuse applications of more than 150 homes would need to refer them to central government or a mayor for potential call-in, effectively removing councils' final say on the largest schemes. Combined with a strengthened National Planning Policy Framework that sets clearer expectations for development around well-connected railway stations, the direction of travel is unambiguous — decision-making on strategic housing sites is moving up, and it's moving toward transport corridors.

For institutional developers, lenders and investors, this is not a marginal procedural change. It resets who you need to engage with on major schemes, how quickly certainty can be reached, and — critically — where the next wave of approvable, investable land is likely to sit.

Why transport nodes are the new planning battleground

The policy logic is straightforward: aligning housing growth with existing transport capacity reduces reliance on new road infrastructure, supports higher densities, and gives strategic authorities a defensible basis for call-in decisions. Spatial Development Strategies — now mandatory for combined authorities with an elected mayor — are explicitly built around growth corridors, and transport-oriented development sits at their core.

This mirrors what REalyse planning data has already shown in London, where the Mayor's call-in remit has processed thousands of major residential applications, with schemes clustering disproportionately around Tube, Overground and rail nodes with strong PTAL (public transport accessibility) scores. Applying that model nationally means combined authority areas such as Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire and the West Midlands could see a similar concentration effect, with sites near HS2 stations, tram interchanges and commuter rail hubs becoming the natural focus of mayoral attention.

For site-sourcing teams, this has a direct comparables implication: REalyse-style analysis of achieved price per sq ft, absorption rates and gross yields around comparable transport-linked schemes elsewhere in a mayor's authority area will become a more useful benchmark than borough-by-borough averages alone, since strategic sites are increasingly assessed against a regional — not local — frame of reference.

What this means for approval timelines and risk pricing

London's own track record offers a useful, if imperfect, precedent. Major applications determined under the Mayor's call-in powers have averaged around ten months from submission to decision — respectable, but still short of government targets, and evidence that shifting authority upward doesn't automatically compress timelines. Coordination between a mayor's office and dozens of constituent boroughs remains complex, and the same friction could recur at combined authority level, multiplied across areas with far smaller strategic planning teams than the Greater London Authority.

There are early signs of momentum elsewhere in the system. REalyse planning data shows residential applications covering over 447,000 proposed units were submitted UK-wide between September 2025 and March 2026, with applications "in progress" up nearly 80% over that period as reforms began feeding through, and approval rates holding at roughly 65% for decided applications. Whether mayoral call-in adds to this momentum or introduces a new layer of pre-decision uncertainty — while local authorities and mayors work out escalation protocols — is the key variable for anyone underwriting a scheme above the new thresholds today.

Lenders and credit teams should treat the referral threshold itself as a new risk marker: schemes just below 150 homes may see sponsors deliberately phasing applications to retain local authority control, while schemes comfortably above it should be underwritten assuming mayoral or Secretary of State involvement is likely, with the timeline and cost implications that brings.

Funding mechanics add a further layer of complexity

Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy powers — currently exclusive to London — are also set to extend to combined authorities with a Spatial Development Strategy in place. That creates a second funding tier alongside existing local CIL charging schedules, and the mechanics of splitting receipts between mayor and constituent councils are still being worked through in consultation. For scheme viability appraisals, this is worth flagging early: GDV assumptions that hold today may need revisiting once mayoral CIL rates for strategic transport-linked sites are confirmed.

Outlook

The direction is clear even if the mechanics are still being consulted on: the government's target of 1.5 million homes this Parliament depends on strategic authorities being able to move major schemes through faster and more predictably than the current fragmented, council-by-council system allows. Mayoral call-in powers, backed by a transport-oriented Spatial Development Strategy, give city-region mayors real leverage to make that happen.

For developers, investors and lenders, the practical takeaway is to start mapping pipeline and land positions against the emerging mayoral geography now — not after thresholds and CIL arrangements are finalised. Sites within strong transport catchments in established mayoral areas, where planning teams already have some track record on strategic decisions, are likely to see the fastest — and most closely scrutinised — path to consent. Comparable-led analysis of achieved prices, yields and absorption near similar transport-linked schemes will be essential to underwriting these opportunities with confidence as the new system beds in.