News
London planning news, February 2020
06 Feb 2020
Contents |
|||
|
|
01
|
|
||||||
|
02
|
||||||||
|
|
03
|
|||||||
|
04
|
||||||||
|
05
|
||||||||
Headline news |
||
In December, the Mayor of London submitted a version of the new London Plan as he intends it to be published, alongside a Schedule setting out his response to the recommendations put forward by the EiP Panel. We covered the key points of interest that emerged from this latest version of the Plan in our recent blog (link below).
On receipt of this final version of the Plan, the Secretary of State was required to respond to the Mayor within six weeks, setting out whether he was satisfied with the final amended version of the Plan or whether he would place a holding direction on the Plan until further changes were made.
However, a letter from the SoS to the Mayor was subsequently published stating he is to extend this period by four weeks, due to him receiving this final version of the Plan in the run up to the General Election and the Christmas recess. This means that the new deadline for the SoS will be Monday 17 February 2020.
Whilst the letter gives few clues as to what his final decision will be, the SoS stated: “I note that there are a significant number of the Inspectors’ recommendations that you are proposing not to follow either in part or in full.”
Crucially, the Plan continues to diverge from national policy in a number of areas, in particular, the approach taken to Green Belt. Where a conflict with national policy exists the SoS has statutory powers to request the Mayor to amend the Plan before final publication.
Whilst the SoS has previously pointed out this inconsistency, it will be interesting to see whether he decides to intervene on this point, given the Conservative Party’s stance on the protection of Green Belt, and the fact that any review of the Green Belt would affect predominantly Tory-run outer London boroughs.
|
|
Quote of the month |
|
|
I note that there are a significant number of the Inspectors’ recommendations that you are proposing not to follow either in part or in full
Secretary of State for Housing Communities & Local Government, Robert Jenrick in his letter to the Mayor stating the extended of time to approve the new London Plan |
||
Tom Copley appointed Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development
Tom Copley has now been appointed Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development. Mr Copley is currently a Lewisham Borough councillor and has been a member of the London Assembly since 2012, where he served as Chair for the Assembly’s Housing Committee.
He will replace James Murray, who left the position to stand as MP for Ealing West in the December general election.
Mayor of London, Mayor of London appoints Tom Copley AM as Deputy Mayor for Housing
Revised regeneration plans for OPDC following failed CPO
The Old Oak and Park Royal Development Cooperation (OPDC) has revised its regeneration plans after being forced to remove the Old Oak North site following concerns surrounding its viability.
The OPDC had applied to acquire the land through a Compulsory Purchase Order, but this was disputed by Cargiant on the basis that 20% of their operations are based on the site.
The loss of the site has decreased the projected number of housing provided within the regeneration from 25,000 to 14,200. This was confirmed by the Planning Inspector’s report (published in September) which suggested that the 54-acre Cargiant site was not viable for the type of residential and associated development proposed in the development plan. The Planning Inspector ultimately supported the opposition to the compulsory purchase and the site is set to remain a location for business and commercial activity.
As a consequence of the decision, the OPDC will no longer be able to take forward the provisional award of £250m of funding from the governments Housing Infrastructure Fund.
The OPDC will now instead focus on partnering with Network Rail and HS2 LTD to bring forward sites under public ownership around the Willesden Junction station and the proposed new HS2 interchange hub.
The issues around viability have been driven by rapidly increasing industrial land values in the London, an issue explored in one of our recent blogs on London’s supply of industrial land.
Mayor of London, New focus for Old Oak and Park Royal regenerationInspectors Report, interim findings on viability of car giant site allocation
SoS allows appeal for development at Westferry
Secretary of State (SoS) Robert Jenrick has allowed an appeal for a mixed-use development at the Westferry Printworks site, situated at Millwall Docks on the Isle of Dogs.
The permitted scheme allows for 1,524 new homes across six towers reaching up to 44-storeys in height, alongside space for retail, office, and food and drink outlets, with landscaping and improvements to the public realm.
The applicant already benefited from a previous permission for 722 homes on the site, approved in 2016 by then Mayor of London, Boris Johnson. However, given the significant expansion in housing provision, the increased height, bulk and massing of the revised scheme gave rise to a range of issues, notably its effects on townscape and visual impacts.
Firstly, the positioning of the buildings would not be consistent with the “step down” approach contained within the borough’s Core Strategy, with the arrangement of the development having an adverse impact in terms of the transition in scale to the surrounding residential areas which are of a much smaller scale.
Issues were also raised relating to the development’s visibility from the nearby Greenwich Maritime and Tower of London World Heritage Sites (WHS), which include the Grade I listed Greenwich naval college and Tower Bridge. While the Inspector considered that the scale and height of the appeal scheme would not cause harm to the strategic views, they identified that that result in harm to the significance of the designated heritage assets, as well as to the setting of the WHS and to the architectural ensemble of the WHS.
Further issues were raised over the scheme’s affordable housing contribution, which by the time of the inquiry had been reduced to 21% on viability grounds – a relatively significant shift from the developer’s original policy compliant proposal of 35% that was put forward when the application was first submitted.
Although the SoS was in agreement with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and the Inspector over the level of harm that proposals would cause to the heritage assets, his decision letter states, that the “less than substantial’ harm to the significance of Old Royal Naval College, Tower Bridge and the Maritime Greenwich World Heritage Site was outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal”.
“When taken together, the additional housing units and the schemes economic contribution proposal should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan.”
Recovered appeal: land at former Westferry Printworks site, 235 Westferry Road
New guidance from City Hall promotes adaptive strategies for high streets
The Mayor has published new guidance as part of his Good Growth by Design programme, promoting adaptive strategies to help the renewal of London’s high streets.
The guidance advocates a ‘mission-orientated’ approach to promoting adaption and renewal, where strategies are formulated in response to specific challenges, such as changing social habits, managing pollution, and the loss of social infrastructure, alongside more development-oriented goals such as achieving greater intensification and mix of uses, and delivering more homes.
These are particularly relevant in the context of the draft new London Plan, which places greater emphasis on the social and cultural role that London’s town centres play, whilst also promoting higher densities in well-connected town centre locations.
Mayor of London, High Streets & Town Centres - Adaptive Strategies
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