Mayor of London planning powers: Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 explained

 

Mayor of London planning powers add an extra strategic layer to some planning applications in Greater London. A borough may still receive and assess the application, but if the proposal falls within a category of potential strategic importance, the Mayor can become involved before the borough is free to issue its decision.

This page explains the process itself: referral, Stage 1, Stage 2 and the Stage 3 call-in route. It is deliberately separate from our guide to the London Plan, which explains the policy framework rather than the mechanics of a Mayoral referral.

The statutory framework is mainly found in sections 2A to 2F of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008, as amended. The 2026 amendments matter because they introduced Category 3J and changed parts of the referral process from 11th May 2026.

A useful starting point is not to think of the Mayor as another planning committee. At first City Hall is normally a strategic consultee. It is only if the application is called in that the Mayor becomes the local planning authority for the purpose of determining it.

 

 

Why do Mayor of London planning powers apply to some applications?

 

Not every London planning application goes to City Hall. The Mayor’s powers apply to proposals which meet one or more categories in the Schedule to the 2008 Order and are therefore treated as applications of potential strategic importance, often shortened to PSI applications.

The categories use different triggers. They cover matters such as the scale of housing, floorspace, tall buildings and some development affecting Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land. Since 11th May 2026, Category 3J also applies to development comprising or including 50 or more houses or flats, although a Category 3J-only application follows a special streamlined process explained below.

The thresholds matter because the Mayor does not have a free-standing power to reopen any London application simply because it is controversial. The correct question is which current statutory category applies to the proposal.

A referable application is still assessed against the development plan, national policy and other material considerations. The Mayoral process changes who must be consulted and, in some cases, who ultimately makes the decision.

 

Stage 1: the first referral to City Hall

 

For the conventional referral route, the London borough or other relevant London planning authority refers the application to the Mayor after receiving it. The 2008 Order requires the application and the relevant plans and documents to be sent as soon as reasonably practicable.

The Mayor then has six weeks to issue the Stage 1 response. In practice GLA planning officers assess the strategic issues and the response is issued under the Mayor’s delegated arrangements.

A Stage 1 report considers the proposal against the strategic planning framework and the London Plan. It can identify changes, further information, planning conditions or planning obligations which City Hall considers necessary before the scheme would be acceptable in strategic terms.

Stage 1 does not normally transfer determination to City Hall. The borough continues processing the application, considering local policy, consultation responses and technical matters, and preparing its own proposed decision. GLA comments can nevertheless be influential, particularly on housing, design, transport, climate policy, affordable housing and section 106 obligations.

 

Category 3J is not an ordinary Stage 1 case

 

The 2026 Order created an important exception where an application is referable only because it falls within Category 3J.

The borough must notify the Mayor when the application is received, but the normal six-week Stage 1 statement does not apply. The Mayor is not required to respond to that initial notification.

If the borough later becomes minded to refuse the Category 3J-only application, it must notify the Mayor again and provide the representations, officer report, proposed refusal and reasons, proposed conditions and relevant draft planning obligation material. The Mayor then has 21 days from acknowledged receipt of that material to decide whether to take the application over, unless the decision is notified sooner.

For a Category 3J-only case the Article 6 direction-to-refuse power does not apply. The relevant intervention is the Article 7 call-in power. If the same development falls within Category 3J and another PSI category, the conventional referral requirements attached to that other category still matter.

This is why a tidy flow chart saying that every application always passes through identical Stage 1 and Stage 2 steps would now be wrong.

 

Stage 2: the borough has reached its proposed decision

 

For the conventional route, Stage 2 follows when the borough has considered the application and sends its proposed decision to City Hall. This may follow a planning committee resolution, but a resolution to grant subject to Stage 2 is not the same as an issued planning permission.

The Stage 2 material includes the borough’s proposed decision, its report and the representations received. Where the borough is minded to grant, the referral also covers proposed conditions and the relevant draft planning obligations or contributions.

The Mayor normally has 14 days to decide which statutory route to take. Depending on the application and the powers legally available, the Mayor may:

• allow the borough to determine the application itself
• direct the borough to refuse planning permission under Article 6
• direct that the Mayor is to become the local planning authority under Article 7 and determine the application at Stage 3

A direction to refuse and a call-in are different. A direction to refuse leaves the borough to issue the refusal. A call-in transfers the determination of the application to the Mayor.

The Order contains tests governing those powers and the exact route can depend on the referral category. For a Category 3J application, the 2026 amendment changes the usual Article 7 tests: the first limb asks whether the development has an impact on the spatial development strategy, rather than a significant impact, and the cross-borough-effects limb does not apply. Sound planning reasons for intervention are still required. The 2026 amendments also altered the position for Category 3J and certain Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land proposals. On a live application, the current Order should therefore be checked rather than assuming that every PSI category works identically.

 

Can an applicant ask the Mayor to intervene after non-determination?

 

Yes. Article 7 contains an applicant request route where the borough has not reached the relevant Stage 2 point within the statutory determination period for a qualifying application.

The applicant makes the request in writing. The request does not automatically transfer the application to City Hall. The Mayor considers whether to exercise the call-in power and has 14 days to respond to a valid applicant request.

This creates an additional option before an applicant decides whether to lodge a normal appeal for non-determination. The routes should not be treated as parallel processes: once a section 78 non-determination appeal is lodged, jurisdiction to determine the application passes to the Secretary of State rather than remaining with the borough for the normal Stage 2 and Mayoral call-in process. On a delayed strategic scheme, the applicant should therefore consider the Mayoral request route, any planning performance agreement and the appeal route before deciding how to proceed.

Beckton Riverside is a current example. The applicant asked the Mayor to intervene after the statutory period had expired before the applications were called in in April 2026.

 

Stage 3: what changes when the Mayor calls in the application?

 

Stage 3 is where the legal role changes. Once the Mayor has directed that the application is to be determined by the Mayor, City Hall is no longer merely commenting on the borough’s recommendation. The Mayor is acting as the local planning authority for the determination.

Section 2F of the 1990 Act requires a representation hearing before the application is determined. The applicant and the local planning authority must be given an opportunity to make oral representations. The Mayor must also publish the procedure which identifies who else may make oral representations and how the hearing is to be conducted.

The GLA’s current procedure allows the decision to be taken by the Mayor or an authorised delegated decision-maker. In recent cases the Deputy Mayor for Planning, Regeneration and Skills has exercised delegated powers at Stage 3.

GLA officers prepare a detailed Stage 3 report before the hearing. It normally covers the development plan, the London Plan, national policy, consultation responses, the borough position, conditions, planning obligations and the other material considerations relevant to the proposal.

The representation hearing is therefore a planning determination process, not simply another borough committee debate. City Hall says hearings are normally announced at least 21 days in advance under the current Representation Hearings Procedure. The hearing is public, but there is not an unrestricted right for anyone present to speak. The applicant and borough have the automatic speaking rights. Under the current published procedure, people and organisations that previously made written representations to the borough or GLA may request to speak, although that does not create an automatic individual slot for every representor; supporters and objectors are normally managed within group speaking periods.

 

What happens to conditions and section 106 at Stage 3?

 

A Mayoral determination can use planning conditions and a section 106 agreement in the same broad way as another major planning decision. The statutory framework also gives the Mayor powers in relation to planning obligations when determining a called-in application.

If the decision-maker resolves to grant subject to completion of a section 106 agreement, the hearing resolution may come before the final issued permission. The planning decision notice is issued only once the requirements attached to that resolution have been satisfied and the authorised decision-maker is able to release the permission. The Stage 3 report and resolution normally set out any delegation to officers to settle the detailed wording of conditions and the legal agreement.

There is no universal Stage 3 deadline by which every section 106 agreement must be completed. A particular Stage 3 report may set a case-specific period and explain what happens if the agreement is not completed in time.

Responsibility for reserved matters, condition discharge and enforcement also needs to be checked from the direction, decision and subsequent arrangements. Call-in does not mean that City Hall permanently takes over every planning function connected with the site.

 

Beckton Riverside: a live Stage 3 example

 

Beckton Riverside is a useful worked example because it shows why the borough committee resolution and the final Mayoral determination must be kept separate.

Newham’s Strategic Development Committee was minded to grant applications 24/00989/OUT and 24/00990/FUL on 23rd October 2025, subject to conditions, a section 106 agreement and the Mayoral referral process. The applicant subsequently requested Mayoral intervention after the statutory determination period had expired.

The applications were called in on 27th April 2026. At the representation hearing on 7th September 2026, Deputy Mayor Jules Pipe approved the proposals subject to prior completion of the section 106 agreement.

Our Beckton Riverside news report covers the scheme itself. The locally hosted Stage 3 report is particularly useful for seeing the determination machinery in practice.

The report recommended that if the section 106 agreement had not been completed by 7th December 2026, the Head of Development Management should refer the matter back to the Deputy Mayor for further consideration. It also proposed that details submitted under the conditions should go to Newham and that Newham should enforce those conditions.

Planning Geek analysis: Beckton is a strong example of why a borough resolution should not automatically be described as the final permission on a referable London scheme. At Stage 3, the decision-maker has changed.

 

How do I know if my application must go to the Mayor?

 

Start with the current Schedule to the Mayor of London Order and identify the exact referral category. Do not rely on an old threshold, a neighbour’s application or the fact that a scheme is simply described as “major development”.

For a potentially referable proposal, check:

• which PSI category or categories apply
• whether the borough has made the initial referral or notification to City Hall
• whether a conventional six-week Stage 1 response is expected or the Category 3J-only route applies
• what the Stage 1 report asks the applicant or borough to address
• whether a borough committee resolution is still subject to Stage 2
• the date on which the relevant Stage 2 or Category 3J decision period starts
• whether the Mayor has allowed the borough to proceed, directed refusal or called the application in

The borough planning register and the GLA planning applications database are both worth following. On a strategic scheme, the City Hall reference and current stage can be just as important as the borough application reference.

 

How do the London Plan, affordable housing and viability fit in?

 

The Mayoral referral procedure is the machinery. The planning merits are still assessed through the development plan and other material considerations.

That is why the London Plan, the wider development plan, affordable housing, transport, design, climate policy and infrastructure can feature heavily in Stage 1 and Stage 3 reports.

Where viability evidence is relied upon to justify a departure from an affordable housing policy position, City Hall may scrutinise that evidence and any review mechanisms. The final package may then be secured through conditions and section 106 obligations.

An emerging London Plan can also be a material consideration depending on its stage and the issues in dispute, but it does not automatically have the same status as the adopted London Plan. Our London Plan guide deals with that policy question separately.

 

The Mayor is not the Secretary of State

 

Mayoral call-in should not be confused with the Secretary of State’s separate power to call in a planning application. The powers have different statutory sources and different decision-makers.

A Mayoral decision does not remove any separate national intervention power which is legally available. Likewise, normal planning appeal rights can still arise.

If a borough refuses following a Mayoral direction to refuse, the applicant may appeal and the Mayor can become involved in that appeal. If the Mayor determines a called-in application and refuses permission, the ordinary section 78 appeal regime is relevant to the applicant.

There is no third-party planning appeal against a grant of permission. A legal challenge may instead arise through judicial review where there is an arguable public-law error. Judicial review is a challenge to legality, not a fresh decision on the planning merits.

 

London’s current powers are different from the proposed powers elsewhere in England

 

London already has an operative statutory Mayoral planning regime. The Government’s August 2026 consultation proposes a related system for mayors of Strategic Authorities elsewhere in England, but those wider application call-in powers are not yet in operation.

Our news guide to proposed mayoral planning powers across England explains that reform. Keeping the two subjects separate avoids treating a proposal for the future as if it already changes a live London application today.

 

Relevant legislation and guidance

 

• Town and Country Planning Act 1990, section 2A – power for the Mayor to become the local planning authority
• Town and Country Planning Act 1990, section 2F – representation hearings
• Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 – PSI categories and referral machinery
• Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) (Amendment and Transitional Provision) Order 2026 – Planning Geek local copy
• London City Hall: current Mayoral powers for planning applications
• London City Hall: referral process for local planning authorities
• London City Hall: public hearings, call-ins, directions to refuse and appeals
• Mayor of London Revised Procedure for Representation Hearings

 

Other Planning Policy Sections

 

Mayor of London Planning Powers Page Created: 9th September 2026