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.

Perhaps most damaging is the “veto” power given to nominated officers. By allowing an unelected official to overrule a Committee Chair, the government is creating a system fraught with conflict that undermines public trust. The London Forum urges the Government to abandon these flawed reforms and instead focus on properly training committee members to ensure high-quality, transparent decision-making.

The full response can be read along with others in our ‘What we’ve said‘ archive.

There is a resident-led analysis report in ‘Community Powered Reporting’ (www.communitypoweredreporting.co.uk) which the authors claim reveals a consistent pattern of decisions by LB Ealing’s leadership that have concentrated disadvantage in Southall’s most deprived communities.

The report is stated to have been reviewed by a legal team to ensure research validity and ethical standards and nothing in it should be understood as an expression of personal opinion. 

London Forum members may be interested in it for the depth of analysis it shows and the implications.

Issue 137 of Planning in London, the journal of the London Planning and Development Forum, has been published, covering the period April-June 2026.  London Forum has a subscription arrangement whereby our members may read it.

Our AI-generated summary can be downloaded.

Table of contents:

• The housing delivery crisis from multiple angles (Berkeley halting land buys, the 84% collapse in starts, viability evaporating across most of London)
• The new NPPF and what it means in practice (minimum densities, simplified local plans, stronger presumption for development)
• The LP&DF Annual Planning Update conference in full
• Specialist opinion pieces on BtR SFH, Gateway 3, resilience, new towns funding, density barriers, viability guidance, and planning appeals reform
• Features on heritage retrofit (Grosvenor’s Retrofit or Ruin), health impact assessments, and international lessons for new towns
• Both book reviews and the Thames Estuary infrastructure investment piece

The full journal is not available on our website. Selected excerpts are available on the PiL website. 

(more…)

The consultation on a new design guidance ended in March 2026.

In a presentation to the Urban Design Group, reported by Building Design, David Rudlin considers what the guidance got right – and where it went wrong.

He is is founding principal of Rudlin & Co and visiting professor at Manchester School of Architecture and a co-author of High Street: How our town centres can bounce back from the retail crisis, published by RIBA Publishing.

Here is a summary of his views on the proposed Design PPG.

In an article on the NLA website, Will Temple, Senior Associate Director at PRD, examines why economic growth alone will not resolve London’s cost-of-living crisis. Drawing on new analysis, he highlights the need to align housing and economic policy to improve living standards across the capital. 

He gives many links in the article to other news and statistics to support his views.

A long newsletter by Chief Planner of MHCLG, Joanna Averley, was published to local authorities’ planning officers on 27th March 2026, covering:-

• Decision delegation,
• Emergency measures to support London housebuilding,
• Refundable deposit scheme for certain single-use drink containers,
• LPAs to set their own planning application fees,
• Government intervention if a LPA intends to refuse planning permission for a housing scheme of 150 dwellings or more,
• Regulations for new Local Plans to be submitted by 31 December 2026,
• The expedited appeals process,
• A Land Use Framework, and
• The Future Homes and Buildings Standards.

On 23rd March 2026 the Government issued a consultation on the New Towns draft programme, including Crews Hill and Chase Park in LB Enfield and Thamesmead in LB Greenwich. The consultation ends on 19th May 2026.

Consultations were commenced also on fees for planning applications, the types of applications that may have to be referred to the Secretary of State and a policy paper on the implementation proposals for streamlining infrastructure planning.

In a blog by the lawyer Nicola Gooch of Birketts, links to those announcements are given, plus comment on them.

Research was commissioned by MHCLG between September and November 2024 to understand how planning policy and guidance supports decision-making on the demolition or retrofit of buildings.

The report by Verian on that research is here. There is strong support for clearer national guidance, standardised carbon assessment methods, fiscal measures such as VAT harmonisation to incentivise retrofit, and mandating consideration of retrofit in planning applications.

Stakeholders highlighted challenges including Local Authority resource constraints and skills gaps in retrofit delivery.

The Government has not indicated yet the next steps.