The government is preparing to streamline the planning process for small and mid-sized housing schemes in England, in a move designed to help deliver Labour’s promise of 1.5 million new homes by 2029–30. Under the proposals, developments with up to nine homes could bypass local councillor committees entirely and be fast-tracked by professional planning officers, while also facing reduced biodiversity and environmental obligations.
Intended to cut through red tape that has long bogged down smaller developers, the reforms would also create a brand new planning class for schemes between 10 and 49 homes, giving developers in this band relief from the building safety levy and more relaxed biodiversity net gain (BNG) targets.
Although widely welcomed by many in the sector, legal experts have sounded a note of caution, warning that the changes could have unintended consequences if not carefully implemented. Nonetheless, for private landlords and small developers, this shift could open the door to profitable new opportunities – especially on smaller plots that previously faced prohibitive planning risks and delays.
Small developers finally heard – and supported
Fergus Charlton, a planning partner at national law firm Michelmores LLP, believes the proposals reflect the frustrations shared by smaller builders at recent events such as the UKREiiF conference in Leeds.
“Only last week at UKREiiF in Leeds small house builders were advocating that they were both lost in the complexity of the planning system and fearful of the combination of speculative planning costs and planning uncertainty,” said Charlton. “These proposed changes will help those smaller businesses.”
For landlords and developers juggling limited budgets and tight project timelines, the ability to proceed without the slow march through planning committee meetings could be transformative. It may also encourage landowners to re-evaluate underused garden plots, garages, or derelict outbuildings – especially in high-demand urban areas where even modest schemes could prove lucrative.
Sites with 10 to 49 units, often overlooked by national housebuilders, would benefit from a simplified planning route and exemptions that reduce the regulatory burden. This “missing middle” of development has long been squeezed by expensive levies and planning gridlock, often falling between the cracks of policy designed either for single homes or mega-developments.
Risks of gaming the system
However, the government’s plan to use numerical thresholds has sparked concern over developers potentially “gaming” the system. Charlton notes that site sizes just below the cut-off points for stricter rules could be deliberately underdeveloped, leading to wasted land and reduced housing density.
“There will also be unintended consequences of setting threshold triggers above which full requirements of the planning system apply,” Charlton warned. “With developers purposefully under-developing sites on the boundaries of these thresholds providing lower housing densities to take advantage of the relaxed rules.”
But is this loophole exploitation—or simply clever strategy? For many experienced landlords and small-scale developers, the proposal may finally allow them to work within the system without needing deep pockets or legal teams to fight every local objection. Some might call it gaming, others might argue it’s simply working smarter.
Take Darren, a landlord-builder in the South West, who’s been sitting on a parcel of land with scope for 10–12 homes but has held off due to planning costs. “If this goes through, I’ll revise the design for nine homes and get it in front of an officer instead of a whole committee,” he said. “I’m not trying to cut corners—I just want to get homes built without spending £30k before I even lay foundations.”
Opportunity or overreach?
There’s no denying the proposals could accelerate delivery for private investors and small landlords who’ve long been priced out of the development game. But will reduced local oversight lead to poor design or erosion of community trust?
Planning reform has always walked a fine line between efficiency and accountability. On one hand, empowering professionals to make routine decisions cuts delays. On the other, removing elected councillors from the equation may be viewed by some as undermining local democracy.
Still, with small-scale housing delivery consistently falling short, this could mark a turning point. Landlords with vision and agility could step in where volume builders stall – unlocking hidden plots and making real contributions to housing stock in areas that need it most.
