Planning for a better London

Residential  roads need 'pinch point' triangles of raised paving with kerbs at each end. Compulsory for every borough to allow them being installed. Reason: I saw and reported: A criminal driving at 50mph chased by 2 police cars with their sirens down such a road. Used in LB Lewisham with 20mph zones. Pinch points (or whatever they are called) stop such inconsiderate though expert driving (I witnessed such a chase) wouldn't get in as the criminal is driving too fast to navigate the 'pinch' with police close behind  keeping up the pressure.  

 On any land that is still left near transport hubs / rail stations only build food and essentials distribution depots (or cycle day-rent auto as at Guildford Rail Stn). Food, milk, olive-oil eggs by train to hub and small electric van to grocer or even supermarket. Supermarkets only allowed near or use electric powered transport. 

London's handling of energy is poor:  little generation and massive waste -  Improvements should be allowed in all areas and not be restricted by regulations such as those currently applying to listed buildings, etc.

Insulation in old London houses is generally appalling but can be expensive and lengthy to improve properly -  Simple improvements in window insulation, etc should not be restricted to preserve old visual appearance.

Solar panels should be installed on all buildings including listed buildings, sponsored financially if necessary - excess electricity being fed into the grid.

(We may need skilled labour from outside the UK to complete all that is possible in good time )

London’s Affordable Artists Studio Network (LAASN) welcomes the ambition of the new London Plan to address the housing crisis and support the creative industries. The economic value generated by artists is widely recognised, as well as their significance as the underlying foundation of one of the biggest industries in London. ‘Sustainable Cities and Communities’ is one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and productiveness and particularly the diversity of productive spaces are key to anchor local wealth, local communities, reduce travel distances, and improve the quality of urban life. We are therefore concerned by the New London Plan’s lack of specific focus on artists’ studios—a distinct and critical part of London’s creative and cultural ecosystem that risks being lost without clearer policy protection, planning mechanisms and funding. 

1. Artist Studios Are Not the Same as Creative or Cultural Workspaces

The term "creative workspace" or “affordable workspace” definition often groups together a broad range of users—putting together artist studio providers with much higher value co-working or office spaces for digital entrepreneurs to units for animators and designers. These groups have different fit-out needs and much higher earning potential than independent artists. The workspace needs of artists—who are typically self-employed, earn lower than average incomes, and regularly require specialist, non-digital, process-based space—are distinct.

The provision of artist studios is typically:

• Non-profit and mission-led
• Basic in fit-out but purpose-built or repurposed for manual, material-based practice
• In need of long-term, secure tenure at genuinely affordable rents

We urge the GLA to distinguish clearly between non-profit artists’ studios and commercial creative or cultural workspace across all policy frameworks—especially in planning definitions, funding criteria, and impact assessments. 

We need to talk honestly about what it means to live in poor housing,because for many of us, this isn’t just a policy issue. It’s our daily life.

Our homes are meant to be our safe spaces. But for too many of us in Roehampton and across London, that’s not the reality. We’re living in flats with damp creeping up the walls, waiting months—sometimes years—for basic repairs. Some of us are raising children in overcrowded rooms, trying to give them a future while struggling to stay warm in the winter. Others are caring for elderly or disabled loved ones in places that simply don’t meet their needs.

It’s exhausting. And it’s unfair.

I’m writing this because I’m tired of seeing people suffer in silence. I’m a resident of Roehampton, and I’ve seen first-hand what neglect looks like—not just in buildings, but in how the system treats the people living in them. We report problems and get ignored. We’re told to wait, to be patient, to manage. But how long can people manage in unsafe conditions?

We need real change. We need housing rules that actually protect tenants and consequences for landlords and housing providers who don’t do their jobs. Repairs should be done quickly and properly, not after a hundred follow-ups. Homes should be warm, dry, safe, and suited to the people living in them.

It’s not too much to ask. We’re not asking for luxury,we’re asking for dignity.

Our homes affect everything,our health, our mental wellbeing, our children’s education, our future. When housing fails, it doesn’t just damage buildings. It damages lives.

Roehampton is a strong, diverse, and proud community, but it’s been left behind. If the new London Plan is truly about fairness and opportunity, then that must be reflected in how it treats its people—not just in promises, but in action.

We need:
Enforceable minimum standards for housing quality

Faster and more accountable repair processes

Better oversight of landlords and housing providers

We deserve homes we can be proud of, not places we struggle . 

Building new homes increases C02 emissions.New homes should be council properties for rent.  Stronger action on renters' rights is also needed. The housing situation is in a similar crisis in other cities like New York or Barcelona.  Air bnbs which are left empty for much of the year are making affordable housing impossible for local people.  The Mayor of Manchester has brought in a Good Landlord Charter - which is a good step forward.  Spain has brought in taxes on empty properties - as have some London boroughs like Newham.  This is also very welcome. The Greater London Assembly's housing committee should scrutinise the Mayor's plans and the results published.  

I feel it is our duty to reinstate as many wetlands as possible across London, which will help with the storage/control of water flow, as climate change takes hold. This will also help to deal with the concentration of pollution that we already have and create natural blue spaces and green corridors which would benefit animal and plant species, which in turn would benefit us all. I believe it is essential for us and the younger generations to be able to connect with and enjoy nature for our mental health and wellbeing. We must not look to building and developing our greenbelt/green-spaces as this could have adverse effects on wildlife already struggling around us. I also suggest that any planed developments should factor in areas where people could have the opportunity to grow their own food like more allotments and community gardens. This could maybe be taught to people and the younger generations via schools and community hubs etc. 🤞🙏✌️❤️

The term ‘creative workspace’ or ‘creative industries’ does not create a clear distinction between non-profit Artist Studios and commercial creative workspaces. Artist studios are usually artist run, supporting typically self-employed, low earning creatives, working multiple jobs to support their practice. This feeds into affordability…

Without a clear definition of affordability, the possibility of artist studios being able to offer artists rent that reflect their incomes is near impossible. New commercial spaces attract commercial creative workspaces who can afford the ‘affordable’ rent offered. Affordability should NOT be calculated as a percentage of commercial market rent but calculated using rates based on the income profiles of London’s artists.

S106 guidelines need to be strengthened in order to protect displaced artist studios due to redevelopment. In many cases the rent offered to artists studios to return to a site once developed are unattainable. Financial help from developers should be key in helping artist studios to find other sites within the area.

Protect what artists you have left, before you loose them. Talk to artist studios directly, they are your eyes and ears and have data that reflects years of working within the industry. They need to be part of the conversation

Yet another poor and narrowly defined survey from Talk London, with limited and biased MCQs. For instance no mention of rented as opposed to owned properties, or to social housing and the distinction between that and affordable housing which is not affordable for many people. These fundamental issues of fairness need to be specifically addressed in any London housing policy. There is also little reference to and hence little opportunity to address potential issues around the social and environmental impact and amenity in any of the proposed development opportunities. There are already some pretty dreadful infill and extension developments in my urban area, with significant impact on the neighbourhood through overbearing structures and/or poor design. Also not addressed are the potential impacts on wildlife and the natural ecosystem which in the end affect us all not just through loss of access and amenity but also on eg the food chains that underpin agriculture and food production. This doesn’t just apply to green/grey belt but also to urban brownfield sites where a balance has to be struck between the need for both housing and green space, for health and wellbeing as well as taking environmental concerns into consideration through ensuring that there is adequate land/street-scaping for green cover and water conservation to help deal with climate stresses around heat, drought and flooding. And finally, much new housing, whether apartment blocks or individual houses, is not fit for purpose in environmental terms, inadequately designed and insulated and ill-prepared for climate heating. We can’t just set aside all these concerns in the interest of increasing housing supply. I really don’t know why the GLA bothers with these surveys, they do nothing to allay the public sense that any consultation is performative and perfunctory and designed to fulfil an existing agenda. 

It is, of course, hard to balance the many competing needs of London, but it seems to me that increasing the amount of social housing (NOT just "affordable housing", which is still not affordable for many Londoners, should be the top priority. Then, I think London needs to increase its green spaces - and encourage small developments that would help this, such as encouraging Londoners NOT to pave their gardens. This would help with flood control and decrease city overheating. Small grants might be offered to those people who would like to remove paving but can't afford to do so.

I would love to see consideration of the environmental impact of developing new housing and preservation of wildlife. Not only is this vital for the wildlife itself and for climate change, but I truly believe that considering and integrating wildlife into plans from the outset is beneficial to the communities that ultimately end of being created. 

Solar panels on new builds, new builds with built in space for nesting birds - swift bricks, roosts for bats. Carefully considered window placement to ensure thermal insulation for both heat retention and keeping homes cool. Using plants growing sustainably on building to do the same. Carefully selected street trees, not just the cheapest option available. Native species that don’t grow to astronomical heights and block of the light and damage foundations.

Even pockets of thoughful and considered planting can make a huge difference. 

The London Assembley or council should be able to take over empty houses or areas not developed after 5 years.  We have an area near me where a house fire occured over 10 years ago.  its a big site and could easily be made into at least two homes but its simply been left.  By contrast a house also nearby was developed into three apartments within two years of the owners death and is now a well kept  home to three local families 

London is already overpopulated and does NOT require more homes within its boundaries.

We need to take a different perspective.

Already the infrastructure of London is broken.

Doctors surgeries are over stretched with appointment waiting times 3 to 4 weeks. Hospital appointments similar with extra pressure on our excellent NHS staff. Policemen a rare sight, enabling shop lifting, car theft and burglaries to become a normal daily occurrence.

The statistics for burglaries might be going down but this is probably due to people not reporting them any more as they are just recorded and nothing more gets done. What's the point?

The only answer is to build SATALITE CITIES such as Welwyn Garden City. In the short term costly but in the long term better living conditions for all.

The London Plan should better facilitate short-term cultural uses—such as theatre venues, film studios, and creative spaces—by reducing planning barriers for meanwhile uses. These uses play a vital role in London’s cultural economy, particularly on underused or vacant land. The following amendments are proposed to enable a faster, more proportionate planning process:

Dedicated Policy for Meanwhile Cultural Uses

Introduce a specific policy supporting temporary cultural and creative uses, recognising their contribution to local identity and economic vitality. Boroughs should be encouraged to adopt supportive SPD or LDO frameworks.

Proportional Sustainability Requirements

Exempt temporary uses from full energy assessments and carbon offset requirements (Policy SI2), allowing for low-impact infrastructure.

Flexible Section 106 and CIL Contributions

Amend Policy DF1 to allow temporary cultural uses to be exempt from Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) obligations where they provide community or cultural benefit.

Adjusted Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) and Urban Greening Requirements

Temporary uses should not be subject to full BNG obligations under Policy G6 and Urban Greening under policy G5. Instead, encourage soft landscaping and low-impact greening measures.

Fast-Track Planning Process

Introduce a fast-track mechanism for cultural meanwhile uses , including a standardised “Meanwhile Use Certificate” with a target 8-week decision period, supported by LDOs and free of charge PPA's where appropriate. 

Support for Activation of Public Land

Encourage GLA, TfL, and boroughs to prioritise cultural uses on vacant public land, offering low-cost leases and planning support.

These amendments will unlock creativity, reduce vacancy, and boost cultural access across London, by reducing time and financial barriers of the developer to make a viable development, while maintaining long-term planning objectives.

I think it is important that we conserve green areas and we shouldn't be building developments on greens between council estate blocks like I keep repeatedly seeing which makes areas feel so dense and hostile. We should be building somewhat taller 5-7 storeys and building more green spaces into developments