London Plan Traveller Pitch Targets Spark Dispute in West London 2026

Key Points

• Disproportionate Pitch Targets: Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan’s draft London Plan sets out a total requirement of 876 new Gypsy and Traveller pitches across London, but targets vary significantly between local authorities—ranging from 73 in Havering down to zero in Kensington and Chelsea.
• Hammersmith and Fulham Burden: Despite being London’s third-smallest borough, Hammersmith and Fulham has been allocated a proposed 10-year target of 24 new pitches by 2036/37.
• Flawed Assessment Allegation: The Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) understands that elements of the initial assessment may be flawed, as the Stable Way Traveller site—located entirely inside Kensington and Chelsea—was allegedly recorded as being within Hammersmith and Fulham.
• Opposition Challenge: Conservative Councillor Jeremy Maddocks, Shadow Cabinet Member for Community Safety, has formally written to the council executive to question the evidence base, spatial viability, and potential pressure on local infrastructure.
• Council Rejection: A spokesperson for Hammersmith and Fulham Council confirmed the authority does not agree with the level of need attributed to it by the London-wide assessment and will formally challenge the figures during the ongoing public consultation.
• Mayoral Stance: A spokesperson for the Mayor of London stated that the strategy addresses a long-standing shortage of sites, adding that individual local authorities retain full responsibility for identifying specific site locations through their own local planning processes.

Hammersmith and Fulham (West London News) August 28, 2026 – A stark disparity in the distribution of proposed Gypsy and Traveller pitches across the capital has sparked sharp political debate in West London, after official draft figures revealed that fulham/hammersmith/">hammersmith-and-fulham/">Hammersmith and Fulham has been set a 10-year target of 24 new pitches while the neighbouring Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea has been assigned a target of zero.

As reported by Ben Lynch of the Local Democracy Reporting Service, Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan’s draft London Plan outlines a city-wide total of 876 additional permanent pitches to be delivered by 2036/37. However, the allocation matrix has drawn criticism from local representatives due to wide variations in targets assigned to central and outer London boroughs. While Havering faces the highest target across the capital at 73 pitches, smaller inner-city authorities have been assigned vastly different figures, prompting calls for greater transparency regarding how spatial needs were calculated.

Why are the draft Traveller site targets causing public concern in Hammersmith and Fulham?

The debate over the proposed allocations centers on the physical constraints of inner-city local authorities and the methodology underpinning the London-wide assessment. Hammersmith and Fulham, which is geographically the third-smallest borough in London, has been allocated 24 new pitches under the draft framework—a figure higher than significantly larger outer boroughs such as Barnet (16), Ealing (11), and Wandsworth (7).

As reported by Local Democracy Reporter Ben Lynch, Conservative Councillor Jeremy Maddocks, Shadow Cabinet Member for Community Safety, raised questions regarding the practicality of meeting these quotas within a densely populated urban area. In a formal letter addressed to Cabinet Member for Community Safety Councillor Lisa Homan, Councillor Maddocks highlighted what he termed “understandable public concern” regarding land availability and competing development priorities.

Writing to his opposite number, Councillor Maddocks stated:

“There has been understandable public concern about a figure of 24 sites in a Central London borough when space is scarce and there is not enough land for existing residents’ needs.”

Councillor Maddocks further noted:

“Residents in Hammersmith and Fulham rightly want clarity on where any proposed Gypsy and Traveller pitches would be located, how suitable space could be found in one of the country’s most densely developed boroughs, and what assessment has been made of the effect on land needed for local housing, community facilities.”

In his formal submission to the council leadership, Councillor Maddocks requested clarification on seven distinct points, including whether Hammersmith and Fulham Council has formally responded to the proposed target, whether it has formally challenged the distribution ratio between itself and Kensington and Chelsea, and what empirical evidence base was drawn upon to determine local need.

Is the evidence base for the Greater London Authority assessment flawed?

Questions surrounding the reliability of the baseline figures have intensified following reports of potential administrative inaccuracies in the initial assessment documents. A footnote within the draft London Plan indicates that Hammersmith and Fulham’s pitch allocation is shared conceptually with Kensington and Chelsea, which holds a target of zero pitches over the coming decade.

However, as reported by Ben Lynch of the LDRS, it is understood that elements of the underlying report prepared for the draft plan may be flawed. Specifically, the existing Stable Way site—which lies entirely within the administrative boundary of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea—was allegedly recorded during assessment procedures as being located within Hammersmith and Fulham.

This potential misclassification has fueled arguments that the baseline assessment miscalculated existing borough-level provision and regional distribution.

In response to inquiries regarding the draft figures, a spokesperson for Hammersmith and Fulham Council stated:

“Hammersmith and Fulham Council does not agree with the findings of the London-wide assessment, particularly the level of need attributed to the borough. Our assessment has reached substantially different conclusions and we will respond to the London Plan consultation accordingly.”

Addressing the broader statutory framework and borough responsibilities, a spokesperson for the Mayor of London defended the strategic objective of the policies, stating:

“The draft London Plan requires every borough to plan for the accommodation needs of Gypsy and Traveller communities, helping to address a long-standing shortage of suitable sites. It is for boroughs to decide how best to meet identified need for Gypsy and Traveller pitches through their local plans, in consultation with their local communities.”

The Mayoral spokesperson added:

“Neither the Mayor nor the GLA have proposed any specific Gypsy and Traveller sites and it is up to the councils to determine together how they will deliver these locally.”

Background of the Traveller accommodation strategy in London

The draft London Plan represents the strategic spatial framework for the capital, setting out long-term planning guidelines, housing delivery goals, and infrastructure requirements for all 32 London boroughs and the City of London. A central element of the overarching housing policy involves providing dedicated, permanent accommodation for Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities, who face documented shortages of legally recognized pitches and transit sites across Greater London.

Historically, pitch assessments have been conducted through localized Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessments (GTANA). Under previous iterations of the spatial strategy, local authorities were tasked with identifying land within their Local Development Frameworks to meet established local demand. However, historical delivery rates across London local authorities have remained uneven, resulting in persistent gaps between identified requirements and actual site completions.

The current public consultation period for the draft London Plan, which is scheduled to run through to October, allows local authorities, community representatives, and residents to submit evidence challenging or supporting the draft allocations. Once finalized and formally adopted, the targets will serve as statutory benchmarks against which local planning policies and land allocations will be evaluated by government inspectors.

Explore More Hammersmith and Fulham News

Hammersmith Fulham Proposes Motorcycle Parking Fees: Hammersmith 2026

London Mayor Names Three Economic Clusters in Hammersmith and Fulham 2026

Prediction: How will this development affect local authorities and residents?

The dispute over the draft London Plan pitch allocations is likely to lead to formal policy challenges from several local authorities prior to the conclusion of the public consultation window in October.

For residents of Hammersmith and Fulham, as well as neighbouring urban boroughs, the immediate outcome will be increased scrutiny of local authority land-use policies. If the proposed target of 24 pitches is maintained in the final London Plan, Hammersmith and Fulham Council will be legally required to identify suitable parcel allocations within its Local Plan. Given the high density of urban development and high land values in Central West London, allocating space for new permanent pitches could intensify competition for sites otherwise earmarked for general housing development, public infrastructure, or commercial expansion.

Conversely, if Hammersmith and Fulham Council successfully challenges the underlying GTANA methodology on the grounds of administrative errors regarding boundary designations such as Stable Way, the Greater London Authority may be required to recalibrate the figures. Such a recalculation would likely redistribute pitch quotas to neighbouring areas, including Kensington and Chelsea, or adjust the net requirement across Inner London.

For the Gypsy and Traveller communities, ongoing disputes over methodological accuracy and spatial distribution risk prolonging delays in site delivery, extending the period of uncertainty surrounding the provision of authorized permanent accommodation across the capital.