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). For each category there should be a comparable average or median cost for London LPAs so that the shortfall is apparent.

While the principles are reasonable, clear implementation guidance will be needed. Many London boroughs will need to use local fee-setting powers to avoid an underfunded planning system.

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

The Old Kent Road was designated by the Mayor in 2016 as an Opportunity Area.

It is the subject of two videos by Urban Design Learning which provides support to local authorities on design and examines development schemes.

In one video, Colin Wilson introduces Southwark Council’s Old Kent Road Action Plan. In another video he explains the issues in regeneration of an area with existing clusters of small businesses, some thriving, and the council’s ambition to add employment as well as housing.

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.

We held a lively interactive meeting on the subject of Artificial Intelligence on 30th April, which was recorded. Our first speaker, Richard Farthing, covered the background and some relevant uses, not only of well-known ‘chatbots’ such as ChatGPT, but also applications that use AI in the background, and real-world examples, particularly around planning. The second half was a full-on interactive session led by John Myers, who tested out several audience questions on live AI services, ranging from planning to creating images.

We naturally chose AI – in the form of Claude.ai – to generate the 1200 word report on the event page, alongside the two videos, and slides, with clickable links allowing you to explore the references mentioned, including the original AI ‘chats’. For comparison, we used both Claude and Google’s Gemini for shorter 300 word summaries below.  In this case Gemini made a bullet-point style summary as you can see, but Claude extracted perhaps a little more detail. Do we need a tool to merge the best of both ? It turns out that there are several tools already available to at least automate side-by-side comparisons.

Claude 300 word summary

AI: A Powerful New Tool for Civic Societies

Richard gave an illustrated introduction to AI, explaining how today’s large language models work and demonstrating their capabilities live. He showed how AI tools can summarise vast planning documents in seconds — a boon for societies grappling with complex applications running to hundreds of files — and introduced specialist tools including Objector.ai, which analyses planning legislation to assess whether there are grounds for objection, and Anti-Render, which produces more realistic versions of developers’ glossy CGI images. He also demonstrated how AI can help check whether images used on websites may infringe copyright.

Richard flagged some important cautions too: AI chatbots can generate plausible but inaccurate information, automated bots are already trawling civic society websites for copyright infringements, and the longer-term societal implications of AI — from job displacement to autonomous weapons — deserve serious attention.

John Myers took a more hands-on approach, taking questions and demonstrating AI tools in real time. He showed how an LLM can quickly locate planning policies, draft consultation responses, and synthesise multiple documents — tasks that would previously have taken hours. A member, Sophie, described how she had built a complete website for a residents’ association using Claude, with no coding background, at minimal cost — a practical example that impressed the room.

Key practical tips from the evening: always give AI as much context as possible about your organisation and local situation; ask the AI to plan before it acts; and always check what it produces before publishing or submitting. On data security, members were advised to avoid uploading personal information and to delete audio recordings and transcripts once minutes have been generated.

The message was clear: AI is already a powerful tool for civic advocacy, and societies that learn to use it well will be better placed to make their voice heard.

Gemini 300 word summary

Empowering Civic Societies with AI

The session highlighted that AI’s greatest strength for societies is in making summaries. Whether dealing with a 119-condition planning application or a dense 800-page developer report, AI tools like Claude and Gemini can extract key issues in seconds, allowing volunteers to focus on strategy rather than “turgid” reading.

Beyond text, the meeting showcased how AI can:

• Defend against copyright claims: By using reverse image searches like TinEye to avoid “trap” images on websites.

• Bridge the volunteer gap: One member shared how she built a complete, professional website for her residents’ association using AI, despite having no coding background.

• Draft Consultations: AI can take a society’s core principles and draft a formal response to government consultations, such as those on planning fees or public house protections.

A Human-Led Future

The speakers emphasised that while AI is an “intergalactic autocomplete,” it lacks a “soul” and local knowledge. The consensus was clear: civic societies should not fear the technology but should use it to level the playing field against well-resourced developers. As John Myers noted, the goal is to “equip ourselves to fight the battle” by combining human passion with machine efficiency.

Members are encouraged to experiment with free versions of these tools but to remain vigilant regarding security—always ensuring that personal data is never uploaded and transcripts of private meetings are deleted once minutes are finalised.

Residents of a block of flats in Kew, many of whom are elderly or vulnerable, are facing eviction after the owner sold the block to Westminster council which has said it needs the building to be empty in order to house the growing number of homeless people in its borough.

Richmond Leader Gareth Roberts wrote to Westminster council, accusing them of showing “disturbing disregard for residents’ well-being” and having responsibility for the “displacement of an entire community”. 

The sources of this story are TheLondoner and member Kew Society

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.