There are growing signs that development activity across England is beginning to gather momentum again. After a prolonged period of caution driven by higher borrowing costs, planning uncertainty and squeezed margins, confidence is slowly returning among developers and professional property investors.
While activity remains uneven, the underlying direction of travel is becoming clearer.
Recent data from Planning Portal supports this view. Planning submissions increased across all regions in England throughout 2025, with particularly strong growth in both full and outline applications.
December’s figures rounded off what was, overall, a resilient and positive year, with 2025 comfortably outperforming 2024 despite the expected seasonal slowdown at the end of the year.
The rise in outline applications is especially notable, as it points to renewed confidence in longer-term development planning, even as some household-level activity softened.
The key question as we move further into 2026 is whether that confidence can be converted into real delivery on the ground. Large-scale schemes offer a useful insight into both the opportunity and the constraints the industry is facing.
One such example is the proposed development at Gilston in east Hertfordshire, which, as reported by The Guardian, is set to be transformed into a network of seven interconnected villages delivering around 10,000 new homes across a 660-hectare landscape of country parks and woodland.
It is exactly the type of strategic development required to address housing supply pressures, yet it also highlights a challenge that is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
Even where planning and land are secured, the construction industry continues to face a shortage of skilled labour. This is not just an issue for headline-grabbing developments. Across the market, investors and developers are already encountering longer lead times to secure contractors, delays between phases of work and increased competition for experienced trades.
As building activity continues to pick up, these pressures are likely to intensify, placing further strain on project timelines.
While much of the attention is focused on large, strategic schemes, the same pressures are being felt further down the market. Smaller developers and professional investors undertaking refurbishments, conversions and value-add projects are competing for the very same pool of contractors and skilled trades.
As activity increases across the board, delays on major sites can have a knock-on effect, pushing back availability for smaller projects and extending timelines in ways that are often outside an investor’s control.
For those relying on short-term funding to acquire and improve property, that shift in timing can materially affect costs and returns.
When build programmes stretch, the structure of finance becomes just as important as the cost of it. In theory, many projects appear straightforward, but in practice they rarely progress in a perfectly linear way. Start dates can slip, works may pause between stages, and capital is not always required when originally forecast.
Yet it remains common for borrowers to take the full value of a facility on day one, paying interest on funds that may sit unused for months.
In a market where labour availability can dictate the pace of delivery, that approach can quickly undermine returns. This is why drawdown facilities are becoming increasingly relevant as development activity increases.
By allowing funding to be released in stages, aligned to how a project actually progresses, investors can reduce unnecessary interest costs and protect cashflow when timelines move.
In practical terms, this flexibility provides a valuable buffer against delays caused by contractor availability or rescheduling.
However, securing a drawdown facility is only the start of the story, and this is where broker involvement becomes increasingly important.
The real value lies in how that facility is structured, managed and deployed over the life of a project. When drawdowns are aligned to realistic build milestones and released only when funds are genuinely required, the financial benefits can be material.
When they are drawn too early or based on overly optimistic timelines, those advantages can quickly be eroded.
In a market where contractor availability and sequencing can dictate progress, ongoing engagement between broker and client is just as important as the initial funding decision. Build programmes are rarely static, and funding needs often evolve as projects progress.
Brokers who stay close to their clients, understand how works are being delivered and anticipate where delays may occur are far better placed to ensure finance continues to support, rather than hinder, delivery.
This approach allows funding to reflect real-world conditions rather than idealised schedules. Asking when capital will actually be needed, how phases of work may overlap or pause, and where flexibility might be required should be central to funding discussions, particularly in a busier but operationally constrained market.
Done well, this level of engagement can help protect cashflow, reduce unnecessary interest costs and improve overall project resilience.
The increase in planning activity suggests the industry is preparing to move again. But delivery will depend on more than confidence alone. Labour availability, project management and cost control will all play a role in determining whether 2026 becomes a year of genuine progress or frustrated intent.
In that environment, flexible funding structures — combined with proactive broker involvement — will be critical.
Investors who focus not just on securing finance, but on deploying it efficiently with the right support around them, will be best placed to protect margins and turn momentum into completed schemes.
