Planning for Progress: A Q&A with Iain Gilbey on the Future of Residential Development

11th August 2025

In this exclusive interview, senior planning partner at multinational law firm Pinsent Masons, Iain Gilbey, shares his insights into the evolving landscape of UK planning policy, the government’s multi-layered approach to reform, and what it all means for residential development. From legislative shifts to the practical realities on the ground, this Q&A explores the opportunities and challenges ahead.

Q: How is the government changing the planning system?

A: The current government, just over a year into its term, has adopted a multi-layered strategy to reform the planning system. Central to this is the belief that planning reform is a key lever for economic growth. Housing and infrastructure development are seen not only as ends in themselves but as catalysts for broader economic stimulus.

The flagship initiative is the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is still making its way through Parliament. Relevant to residential development, this bill proposes several significant changes, including:

  • Allowing local authorities to set their own planning fees to better fund services.
  • Mandating compulsory training for elected members on planning committees.
  • Delegating more decisions to planning officers to streamline processes.
  • Introducing spatial development strategies to support regional planning.
  • Enabling further devolution through regional development authorities.

These legislative changes aim to empower development and improve delivery, but they will take time to implement and filter down to local decision-making.

Q: What impact will this legislation have, and when will we see results?

A: Legislative reform is, by nature, a gradual process.. Even once the Planning and Infrastructure Bill becomes law, its practical impact may not be felt for another year or two. The more immediate and pressing challenge lies in the capacity of local planning authorities, many of which are under-resourced and facing difficulties in retaining skilled staff. Without adequate personnel, even the most ambitious reforms risk faltering at the point of delivery.

However, not all change moves slowly. Recent amendments to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)—particularly the introduction of the “Grey Belt” concept—are already driving tangible outcomes. These policy shifts have enabled housing developments and economic development, including data centres to gain approval in areas previously considered unsuitable, demonstrating that targeted adjustments can unlock immediate opportunities.

Q: How is the industry responding to these changes?

A: The industry has broadly welcomed the reforms, recognising their potential to unlock new opportunities for development. While there’s a pragmatic awareness that local authorities may face challenges in aligning with central directives—often due to local circumstances or limited resources—there remains optimism about the direction of travel.

At the same time, developers are increasingly viewing appeals and Secretary of State interventions as effective routes to securing approvals. Angela Rayner’s recent intervention in the Quinn Estates applications in Sittingbourne, Kent, is a notable example. Despite local opposition, the government’s involvement underscored its commitment to delivery. This evolving dynamic suggests that, for some developers, appeals may offer greater speed and certainty in navigating the planning system.

Q: What opportunities do the Grey Belt, Greenbelt, and new towns policies offer?

A: The Grey Belt policy has been particularly impactful. It has opened up areas in the South East of England see by way of example a recent run of successful appeals in St Albans—long resistant to large scale residential development—to new housing schemes. These decisions, some challenged in the High Court, have largely survived the appeal process, indicating strong support for the new policy direction.

In contrast, green-belt sites that don’t qualify as “grey belt” still require developers to demonstrate “very special circumstances” to gain approval. However, if a site can be reclassified as Grey Belt, it benefits from a more favourable planning environment.

As for new towns, the New Towns Task Force is expected to publish its final report in September. While this will identify potential sites for large-scale development, it won’t directly influence planning decisions in the short to medium term. The government has acknowledged that these new towns won’t contribute to its target of 1.5 million homes during this Parliament, underscoring the long-term nature of this initiative.

Q: Are there other significant changes we should be aware of?

A: Yes, one of the more technical but important shifts is the move towards a rules-based planning system. Currently, planning decision making is highly discretionary, with decisions often hinging on subjective interpretations of policy. The government is exploring mechanisms like National Development Management Policy and design codes to reduce this subjectivity. If a proposal complies with these rules, it could be approved more swiftly, offering greater certainty for developers.

One area attracting increased attention is the implementation of the Building Safety Act, particularly in London. In the wake of Grenfell, tall buildings are now subject to more rigorous safety standards, reflecting a necessary shift toward enhanced accountability. The Health and Safety Executive, which oversees this regime, is working to scale its capacity to meet demand—though the volume and complexity of applications have created some very significant delays. For many developers, navigating this process has become a central focus, often taking precedence over planning or viability considerations.


Q: What’s the overall outlook for residential development?

A: We’re undoubtedly in a more pro-development policy environment than before. The government’s messaging and reforms reflect a strong commitment to delivery. However, the gap between policy and practice remains wide. Local authorities’ capacity issues, coupled with procedural delays, mean that change is incremental.

Still, the industry is adapting. Appeals are becoming an often preferred route, and developers are learning to navigate the new rules. Over time, these reforms—especially the shift towards a rules-based system—could reshape the planning landscape in meaningful ways.

Summary

The planning system is undergoing significant transformation, driven by a government keen to stimulate growth through development. While legislative changes will take time, policy adjustments like the Grey Belt reclassification are already making waves. The industry is responding with cautious optimism, balancing enthusiasm for reform with the realities of local implementation.

As Iain aptly puts it, “We’re now operating in a far more pro-development policy environment than we were previously.” The challenge now is turning that policy into delivery.