Harrow Council Unanimously Opposes Draft London Plan Over Green Belt and Housing Concerns
Harrow councillors have unanimously voted to oppose the draft London Plan, citing significant concerns over its impact on the borough's Green Belt and its proposed housing targets.
The council meeting on Thursday, October 1, 2026, saw cross-party agreement in rejecting the draft London Plan, with councillors arguing it would weaken protections for Harrow's Green Belt and lead to an unacceptable increase in housing development on greenfield sites.
Councillor Marilyn Ashton, who moved the motion, stated that the draft plan significantly increases Harrow's housing target for the next decade by nearly 50%, making it the sixth largest increase in Greater London. She argued this plan, enabled by the Labour government's revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), would weaken Green Belt protections and open the door for developers.
Councillors believe the draft London Plan would weaken protections for Harrow's Green Belt by designating 'Broad Locations for Growth' (BLG) based on proximity to transport hubs. Specifically, the 'Northwood' BLG, which covers areas like Hatch End, Headstone, Pinner, and Harrow Weald, contains most of Harrow's Green Belt. The plan proposes that Green Belt land within a BLG would see its protection reduced, allowing for easier alteration of boundaries or release from Green Belt classification, despite this area being recognized as 'high performing' Green Belt land.
Councillor Ashton clarified that her support for enabling development on the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital site was due to very special circumstances,
which is an acceptable exception within Green Belt policy, and that this was distinct from the broader concerns about the draft London Plan.
An amendment by Councillor David Perry, Leader of the Labour Group, which sought to foster cross-party collaboration and invite the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, to visit Harrow to understand the importance of its green spaces, was ultimately lost. Councillor Perry's amendment also proposed that the Leader of the Council and the Leader of the Opposition jointly write to the Mayor of London.
During the debate, Councillor Matthew Goodwin-Freeman criticised the draft London Plan, stating it was not worth the paper it is written on
and accused the Mayor of London of a land grab on the green belt.
Councillor Rhys Benjamin highlighted the Outer London Paradox,
arguing that the draft London Plan fails to recognise the distinct needs of outer London boroughs. He stated that the plan treats outer London the same as inner London regarding metropolitan open land (Green Belt) and that the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, seems unaware of the intricate situation faced by outer London boroughs like Harrow. He also pointed out that the plan's designation of stations as 'well-connected' for Green Belt development is questionable given the limited train services and outdated rolling stock on lines like the Bakerloo Line.
Councillor Benjamin stated that stations like Hatch End and Headstone Lane are designated as 'well-connected' Green Belt stations but only have four trains per hour. He also noted that residents in the eastern half of his ward rely on Kensington Station and the Bakerloo Line, which has the oldest rolling stock in the UK (constructed in 1972) and is not expected to have its trains replaced for another 10 years. He considers these services insufficient and indicative of Khan's 'managed decline of Transport for London.'
The draft London Plan is enabled by the Labour government's revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Councillor Marilyn Ashton stated that the NPPF, specifically section G-B7, declares 'open season on Harrow's Green Belt for developers' by setting out that development is not inappropriate in the Green Belt. Councillor Stephen Greek also noted that the NPPF's definition of a 'well-connected' station (800 meters, or a 10-minute walk) is in direct conflict with the Draft London Plan's proposal of up to 1,200 meters, which brings stronger performing Green Belt land into scope for development.
The substantive motion opposing the draft London Plan was subsequently carried.