News
London planning news, March 2021
02 Mar 2021
Contents |
|||
|
01
|
||||||||
|
|
02
|
|
||||||
|
03
|
||||||||
|
04
|
||||||||
|
05
|
||||||||
Headline news |
||
New London Plan formally published
The new London Plan 2021 has been published.
A final version of the Plan has been publicly available since 21 December 2020, following the Mayor issuing his Publication version of the Plan for final approval, after having incorporated the majority of the directed changes from the SoS earlier on in that month. A month later, the SoS had subsequently written to the Mayor confirming that he would not direct any further changes to the Plan, allowing the Mayor to proceed, notably just in time for the pre-election restrictions that might have prohibited its publication.
We look at the final amendments to the Plan in our blog “Any plans for March? Mayor publishes his final version of the London Plan”, with the key changes related to policies on Green Belt, industrial land, density, tall buildings, and car parking. As summarised in our blog, the final amendments made in response to the directions hand some controls back to boroughs in terms of how they plan for development, though many decisions over how land is best utilised will be more market driven, particularly given other national changes to the planning system. Reflecting on the priorities and challenges of the Government’s wider agenda for planning reform, the SoS’s priorities clearly lie with delivering new homes, although there is an attempt to balance this message with assurances over design quality and the impact new development may have on lower density outer boroughs constrained by Green Belt.
As before, the London Plan forms part of the development plan for all London boroughs, as such planning applications in London will be considered against the new London Plan’s policies and those within the individual borough local plans – albeit the Mayor of London has been giving increasing weight to the policies of the new Plan for some time.
There may be instances where there is a divergence in policy with older local Plans and the new London Plan, in such instances, the more recent London Plan policies will generally be given greater weight in the planning decisions. Going forward, future Local Plans will be expected to be in “general conformity” with the new London Plan, by virtue of S24 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
While both the SoS and Mayor had agreed that getting the new London Plan adopted would be critical in providing the certainty and strategic direction needed for London’s recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic, the comments in the SoS’s most recent letter indicate he is far from satisfied with the ambition and direction of the Mayor’s strategy for London. On reminding the Mayor that he has powers to order either a review or alterations to the London Plan, the Secretary of State commented:
“Notwithstanding the above you still have a very long way to go to meet London’s full housing need, something your plan clearly and starkly fails to achieve. Londoners deserve better and I will be seeking to work with those ambitious London Boroughs who want to deliver over and above the housing targets you have set them”.
The SoS is clear that moving forward he expects the Mayor to “dramatically increase the capital’s housing delivery”, with the next London Plan expected to fill the significant gap between delivery and housing need. The letter states the SoS wishes to work with “ambitious London Boroughs who want to deliver over and above the housing targets”.
Mayor of London, Publication London PlanSecretary of State Robert Jenrick's letter to Mayor, 24 December 2020
|
|
Quote of the month |
|
|
Now that you are in a position to be able to publish your London Plan I fully expect you to start working to dramatically increase the capital’s housing delivery and to start considering how your next London Plan can bridge the significant gap between the housing it seeks to deliver and the actual acute housing need London faces. I would again ask you to work closely with those authorities that surround London to develop a strategy to help alleviate the housing pressure that is faced both inside and immediately outside the capital.
Secretary of State for Housing, Communities, and Local Government, Robert Jenrick, in his letter to the Mayor, dated 29 January 2021 |
||
Mayor of London and London Assembly elections 2021
Many local authorities around the country will be holding local elections on Thursday 6 May 2021, this will also include many of those which had been postponed in May 2020, including elections for the Mayor of London and London Assembly Members.
The Local Government Association have stated that the pre-election period is set to begin no later than 22 March 2021, with no political announcements or decisions permitted to be made during this period.
New guidance on internal and elevated public spaces
The Mayor has published Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) providing advice on London’s public realm, focusing specifically on the role that internal and elevated spaces function as part of London’s network of public spaces.
The document is aimed at developers, land-owners and designers bringing forward proposals that include internal, semi-internal or elevated public spaces, and for planners and local authorities in assessing applications. The SPG relates to Policy D8 (Public Space) in the new London Plan, with the supporting text stating that elevated spaces can also be considered as part of the public realm.
The supporting text states that many internal or elevated spaces can also be considered as part of the public realm, including “markets, shopping malls, sky gardens, viewing platforms, museums or station concourses”. It is noted that these types of space have come to play an increasingly prominent role in London’s public realm, particularly given the shift towards higher density development.
The guide is structured around eight principles, including accessibility and connectedness, ecology and environmental matters, movement and dwelling, which cover issues such as signage and adaptability. Consideration is also given to the variety and diversity of possible uses, as well as matters around inclusivity. Detail is provided on particular design aspects, such as the treatment of thresholds between inside and outside, as well as between the wider public realm network and individual spaces; other matters include shelter, comfort, and shade for the public.
A range of illustrated case studies are appended to the SPG. These include examples of best practice from a range of different spaces, such as the Sky Garden in the City of London, Wembley Park Station, the British Museum, the Stratford Centre, and Dalston Roof Garden.
Mayor of London, Expanding London's Public Realm
Mayor publishes research on London’s social infrastructure
The Mayor has published new research on London’s social infrastructure, focusing on ways this can be strengthened and better connected, with recommendations for authorities that could support the vitality of London’s high streets and town centres.
Social infrastructure is defined broadly as the services and facilities that “meet local and strategic needs and contribute towards a good quality of life”. As the report sets out, such facilities and services might include education and health services, libraries and community centres, sports facilities, places of worship, London’s parks and outdoor-spaces, as well as independent businesses such as music venues, cafés and hairdressers.
The report identifies High Streets and town centres as important sites for social integration, with the cities infrastructure and public spaces acting as a key driver of high street economies and an important aspect of public life.
Authorities are encouraged to identify locally specific social infrastructure needs within local plans and town centre strategies; this evidence should be used to inform local planning decisions. The report also supports the clustering of civic uses in and around well-connected areas, such as town centres, and around parks and open spaces. It is also suggested that local organisations and community groups should be involved in the codesign and governance of new facilities – particularly in areas undergoing significant levels of change.
Recommendations are also provided for the design of new physical infrastructure, in particular upgrades to the public realm, workspace and larger residential developments, calling for consideration of co-location, flexibility of use, accessibility, and safety, in order to sustain and encourage social interaction, and encourage partnerships and existing networks within the city.
Interestingly, the recent changes to the Use Classes Order are discussed, with potential risks highlighted for some uses such as convenience stores, health centres, nurseries and day centres, which could potentially face pressure from higher value uses falling within the new Class E of the Order. A reminder is given that under the existing planning system, authorities can “place planning conditions or legal agreements on decisions for uses where social infrastructure facilities are secured to ensure their protection and longevity”.
Mayor of London, Connective Social Infrastructure
Two combined judicial reviews have been successfully brought against the Mayor’s Streetspace scheme and a Traffic Management Order which prohibited the use of motorised vehicles, including licensed Black Cabs, along Bishopsgate in the City of London.
Mrs Justice Lang found that in making and delivering the London Streetspace plan, the Mayor of London and Transport for London had not given sufficient regard to the relevant considerations, while also failing to distinguish London’s black cabs from "general traffic", breaching the claimants' “legitimate expectation to use London's roads and bus routes”.
Among other matters, it was found that the scale, ambition and description of the proposals went beyond what was considered reasonable; some interventions appeared to have been made permanent, however, there was no evidence that this was required, with the decision making process considered to as “seriously flawed”.
Mrs Justice Lang went on to say at para 266:
“The flaws identified were symptomatic of an ill-considered response which sought to take advantage of the pandemic to push through, on an emergency basis without consultation, "radical changes”.
While the judge noted the approach appeared to be supported in guidance, with a statement from the Transport Minister declaring that this was a “a once in a generation opportunity to deliver a lasting transformation in how we make short journeys in our towns and cities”, the Mayor’s justification, that following lockdown there would be a major increase in pedestrians, cyclists, and traffic, were not evidence-based. Changes on the scale proposed by the Mayor required proper consultation and consideration of the existing policies which are in place.
United Trade Action Group Ltd & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Transport for London & Anor [2021] EWHC 72United Trade Action Group Ltd & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Transport for London & Anor [2021] EWHC 73
|
|
The Lichfields perspective |
|
|
Sadiq has been on a long journey to ensure his London Plan (rather than Boris’s 2016 version) forms the part of the statutory Development Plan for Greater London shortly before he seeks re-election. The substance of the Mayor’s spatial development strategy has though long been driving the face of planning for development across the capital through higher housing targets, affordable housing viability review, industry and housing colocation, design-led optimisation of sites, healthy streets and many other of the Mayor’s Good Growth policies. That will now continue with statutory force whilst the Mayoral team returns to the enduring challenge as to how the next Plan review does plan for sufficient supply to meet the Government’s view on London’s greater housing need, a task inevitably requiring the inclusion a fundamental review of London’s Green Belt and MOL. |
||
Disclaimer: This publication has been written in general terms and cannot be relied on to cover specific situations. We recommend that you obtain professional advice before acting or refraining from acting on any of the contents of this publication. Lichfields accepts no duty of care or liability for any loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from acting as a result of any material in this publication. Lichfields is the trading name of Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Limited. Registered in England, no.2778116