London won't get the homes it needs until planning is reformed

The plan seeks to provide 23,000 new homes each year – a long way short of the 42,000 recommended in the mayor's housing commission report from his earlier days.

Nevertheless, achieving 23,000 new homes every year will be a dramatic increase on current delivery. Apart from identifying locations for new provision, there are no practical proposals other than increasing density.

It is important to understand that the mayor has no ability to deliver or target Housing Corporation funding for social housing nor to speed up the planning process.

Major concerns are emerging on the significant differences between the London plan and unitary development plans (UDPs) drawn up by local authorities. Ultimately, UDPs are to conform with the London plan.

Over this same period, we may well see central government bring forward planning reforms. The result will inevitably be chaotic and securing planning consents will become even more difficult than at present.

We will have to increase the 23,000 target to 280,000 a year if the numbers are to be met by 2016. This will not be possible unless we secure fast-track consents.

Creating housing above supermarkets, filling stations and shops such as PC World and B&Q needs the direct interest of commercial operators and investors. What the planning authorities need to recognise is that these organisations have different timescales for decisions from developers and quick decision-making processes are needed.

It is time for a constructive approach that delivers intrinsically sustainable development that can secure fast-track consent. The 10-point plan could include the following guidelines:

• The scheme should be on a brownfield site.
  
• The scheme should meet a predetermined architectural/design standard.
  
• A sustainability audit should be done.
  
• An environmental impact assessment should have been undertaken.
  
• A traffic impact analysis should be done.
  
• The scheme should be designed for less dependency on the car, for example at a higher density and with less space for parking.
  
• The scheme should comply with the Egan framework.
  
• The scheme should include an element of community investment.
  
• The developer should undertake full consultation with the local planning authority.
  
• The scheme should make provision for 25% publicly subsidised affordable housing at 100% of the net total cost indicator.

Despite 50 years of planning control, we have massive dereliction and huge disparities of wealth. Many communities have not gained from economic growth

If this plan could gather support at central, regional and local levels, we may be able to deliver the mixed-use schemes necessary to meet London plan targets.

Despite 50 years of planning control, we have massive inner-city dereliction, third-generation unemployment and huge disparities of wealth and opportunities.

Many communities have not benefited from London's economic growth.

Some would argue that London's most attractive urban renaissance has been created outside the planning regime at Canary Wharf. It has given rise to a major economic stimulus and created landmarks.

Securing planning consent is essential to deliver homes, but this can only come about when landowners see sufficient return.

Planning gain is a major bone of contention – as demands increase, land value falls. The London plan indicates that developers may have to provide schools, as well as the usual highways, public open spaces, transport subsidies, community facilities and rising affordable housing requirements. Such high demands may have a serious impact on land supply – and 50% of nothing is nothing.

The level of affordable housing needs to be considered if we are to deliver homes for all tenures needed. The proposed tenure split of 35% for social rent, 15% for key workers has to be seriously questioned when recruitment of key workers is in crisis and at least 90% of new households aspire to ownership.