![Crews Hill Station [Photo: Enfield Society]](https://i0.wp.com/www.londonforum.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Crews-Hill-station-1024x614-1.jpg?resize=1024%2C614&ssl=1)
Response to New Towns Draft Programme Consultation
We’ve responded to the government’s New Towns Draft Programme Consultation.
The Forum does not support the classifying inner-urban developments or Green Belt extensions as ‘New Towns’. We argue that proposals like Chase Park/Crews Hill (Enfield) and South Barking do not possess the geographic or socioeconomic separation required to build a ‘clear and distinct identity’. Instead, we view these as vehicles designed to accelerate housing delivery while bypassing standard national Green Belt protections and planning scrutiny.… Read more...
Planning Fees consultation response
We’ve responded to the government’s consultation on planning application fees.
While the proposal to set a National Default Fee Schedule at 90% of estimated costs is a step in the right direction, we argue that it’s too blunt an instrument. London’s planning costs are significantly higher than the national average — due to heritage requirements, high-density development complexity, and staffing costs — yet the consultation lacks transparency about how the funding shortfall is distributed across local planning authorities (LPAs).… Read more...
Planning Committee Reforms: Stop the Attack on Local Democracy!
The London Forum has issued a scathing response to the Government’s recent consultation on Planning Committee reforms.
The proposals were branded as authoritarian and anti-democratic
Despite claims that these changes will focus committees on complex cases, the draft regulations actually prevent many significant, contentious applications from ever being seen by elected members.
Under the new “Schedule 1” and “Schedule 2” system, the overriding assumption is that almost all applications will be decided by officers. The Forum is particularly concerned that conservation areas have been excluded from special consideration, and that major phased developments—which can impact communities for decades—will lose essential public scrutiny.… Read more...
National Planning Policy Framework consultation response
We’ve responded to the December 2025 NPPF consultation, which closed on 12th March 2026. This substantial piece of work, contributed to by many subject matter experts, is posted in the ‘what we’ve said‘ archive as usual, and directly linked below for your convenience. It is now fully indexed for searching too.
We are critical of some of the new decision making policies.
Response to ‘Towards a new London Plan’
We’ve formally responded to the consultation on ‘Towards a new London Plan’, which closed yesterday evening, following on from the presentation by the Deputy Mayor, Jules Pipe, at London Forum’s event on 13th May.
We used some AI tools to help summarise our answers to the long set of questions in a readable format, with the detailed summary now held in our ‘What we’ve said’ archive here.
A shorter summary can be found below:
Section 1: Introduction
London Forum expresses strong reservations about the imposed Government’s housing target for London of 88,000 new homes per year, arguing that it was accepted by the Mayor without a proper assessment of London’s actual needs.… Read more...
DCMS Inquiry: Protecting Built Heritage
We’ve responded to the recent DCMS inquiry on Protecting Built Heritage, the response is posted in the ‘what we’ve said‘ archive as usual, and linked below for your convenience.
London Forum commented on the need for funding for English Heritage and Historic England, the importance of grants from the Heritage Lottery Fund and the deployment of enough skilled heritage practitioners.
Consultation Responses
We’ve responded to a couple of recent MHCLG and GLA papers, the responses are posted in the ‘what we’ve said‘ archive, and linked below for your convenience:
Didn’t find what you’re looking for? Try a new search:
How Effective is Planning Enforcement? Meeting Record & Video
Last week we held a well-attended talk on the subject of Planning Enforcement, chaired by Brian Keane of PE&T, which ...
Consultation on Heathrow expansion
A Draft Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement (HENPS) consultation has been published with a deadline for responses by 1st September ...
AI tool to halve planning decision times
A new AI facility is being tested in Barnet and Camden boroughs to speed up decision times.
The facility assesses ...
Garden Annexe, Caravan, or Mobile Home?
Tim Catchpole of the Mortlake and East Sheen Society writes…
Our Society has had a recent experience which we would like to share with other London Forum members who may or may not have had a similar experience.
As a rule we do not normally make comments on planning applications for any development that is not visible from the public realm. However, the application in question was for planning permission for the ‘construction of a granny annex ancillary to the main house.’… Read more...
Most Popular This Week
-
Member Services Committee meeting
📅 Thu 6th August | 14:00 - 16:00
🚩 Room F3 70 Cowcross St, EC1M 6EJ (map)
-
Planning, Environment and Transport committee meeting
📅 Thu 13th August | 14:00 - 16:00
🚩 Room B1 70 Cowcross St, EC1M 6EJ (map)