The Planning and Regeneration Committee met on Tuesday 18 November 2025 to discuss the role of mid-rise development in addressing London's housing needs and how the London Plan could support it. The committee heard from various stakeholders, including representatives from the Greater London Authority (GLA), and discussed challenges and opportunities related to increasing housing density.

Mid-Rise Development and the London Plan

The committee engaged in an extensive discussion regarding the definition, benefits, and challenges of mid-rise development in London. There was a general consensus that London is less dense than comparable global cities and that increasing density, particularly through mid-rise development, is crucial for meeting housing targets.

Defining Mid-Rise: While the current London Plan lacks a specific definition for mid-rise development, the discussion suggested a range from three to twelve storeys, with common references to four to eight storeys. Experts highlighted that the definition is context-dependent, varying significantly between different areas of London. Nicholas Boys Smith MBE, Founder and Director of Create Streets, advocated for the term gentle density to encompass a broader range of typologies beyond just height.

Benefits of Mid-Rise Development:

• Housing Supply: Mid-rise development was identified as a key strategy to increase housing supply and meet the Mayor's target of 88,000 homes per year. Experts suggested that even modest uplifts in density in suburban areas could yield significant numbers of new homes.
• Sustainability and Net-Zero Targets: Mid-rise buildings were considered more energy-efficient to manage and use less energy per cubic metre compared to high-rise buildings. They also make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and encourage more sustainable lifestyles, such as increased use of public transport and active travel.
• Community and Liveability: Michael Ball, Co-ordinator and Media Worker for Just Space, argued that mid-rise blocks often foster more communal experiences and can be more flexible for refurbishment and extension than tall buildings. He also noted that mid-rise developments are generally not gated, allowing for greater community integration.
• Economic Viability: While acknowledging current viability challenges in London's property market, some panellists suggested that mid-rise schemes, particularly those of six storeys or below, could be viable in higher-value areas. De-risking the planning process and empowering smaller developers were highlighted as ways to improve viability.

Challenges and Considerations:

• Planning and Viability: Constraints on planning permissions and economic viability were identified as major barriers to increasing mid-rise development. The cost of land, construction, and regulatory requirements, such as second staircase provisions, were cited as significant factors.
• Local Consent and Public Engagement: The process of gaining local consent for densification was a recurring theme. Panellists discussed the challenges of vocal opposition from existing residents and the need for more inclusive and strategic engagement methods. Tools like Street Votes and citizen assemblies were proposed as ways to involve a broader range of voices, including future residents. Hana Kapetanovic, Lead Researcher at Demos, highlighted that many Londoners do not know how to participate in planning consultations, indicating a significant knowledge gap.
• Context and Character: The importance of context-specific design and integration into existing neighbourhoods was stressed. Panellists cautioned against developments that are out of context, citing examples like the Hondo Tower in Brixton, which faced significant opposition.
• Inner vs. Outer London: It was noted that the challenges and opportunities for mid-rise development differ between Inner and Outer London. Transport infrastructure was identified as a critical factor for densification in Outer London.
• Definition and Policy in the London Plan: There was a strong call for the next London Plan to include a clear definition and policy for mid-rise development, similar to the existing policy for tall buildings, but with a focus on promoting mid-rise as a priority. The reintroduction of a dynamic density matrix was also suggested.

International Comparisons and Best Practice:

• Paris: Praised for its high-quality, dense mid-rise developments, particularly in areas like Le Plessis-Robinson and Clamart, which have successfully integrated social housing and created thriving neighbourhoods. The role of trams in facilitating new, dense suburbs was also noted.
• Scandinavia: Examples from Stockholm (Hammarby) and Copenhagen (Nordhavn) were highlighted for their sustainable, mixed-use, medium-density developments that prioritise public transport and minimise car use.
• Croydon: The borough's Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) was discussed as an example of a policy that enabled significant densification, though its political durability was questioned due to its impact on local character.
• Auckland, New Zealand: Mentioned for its city-wide zoning reforms that compelled intensification around transport nodes, leading to lower rents and house prices.
• United States: Examples from Austin and California were cited for legislation allowing intensification of single-family plots into blocks of flats.

The committee also noted the action taken by the Chair under delegated authority to agree the Committee's response to proposed legislative changes regarding the planning powers of the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC). The response did not object to the additional powers requested, which would align OPDC's powers with those of other Mayoral Development Corporations.

The committee's work programme for 2025/26 was also noted, with upcoming topics including public engagement with design, new towns for London, and living in a heating city.