News
London planning news, February 2022
03 Feb 2022|
Contents |
|||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
01
|
||||||||
|
02
|
||||||||
|
03
|
||||||||
|
04
|
||||||||
|
05
|
||||||||
Headline news |
||
The Levelling-up White Paper and London
The Government has now published it long awaited Levelling Up White Paper. This sets out its strategy to reconfigure the UK economy and local government, with the aim of distributing wealth more fairly so as to close historical inequalities across the UK.
The White Paper is structured around 12 missions, which include employment and productivity, transport, housing, research and development, skills, health and well-being, as well as pride of place. For a more detailed analysis of the proposals and how these will affect the development sector, please see Ed Clarke’s blog on the White Paper.
Reorganisation of local government is considered key to achieving the Government’s mission, which the Government claims will see the “biggest shift of power from Whitehall to local leaders in modern times”, with a “London-style” model of devolution on offer for areas willing to take on additional powers. While the White Paper celebrates London’s economic performance and suggests that aspects of its governance model and transport network could be replicated elsewhere, the report notes that London is distinct from other parts of the country, and comes with its own set of problems:
“On many measures, London looks quite different from the rest of the UK. On the positive side, it has a much higher level of skills, a higher stock of tangible and intangible capital, and better digital and transport infrastructure. It also has a younger, more mobile population. On the downside, it has worse outcomes in subjective measures of social capital and its transport and housing infrastructure is under the greatest strain, despite higher investment.”
The White Paper argues that this has placed pressure on the capital’s infrastructure and housing stock, resulting in higher costs of living, greater congestion and more severe levels of pollution. In particular, the issue of overcrowding and prevalence of homeless households is noted as being far worse than other regions.
The Levelling Up Advisory Council will consider how London’s complex economic geography and socio-economic spectrum can benefit from the levelling up agenda.
While the Prime Minister has previously tried to assure the public that levelling-up would not be at the expense of successful places, the White Paper does indicate a shift in the geography of funding allocations from central Government.
The current 80/20 funding split for housing infrastructure funding, which currently directs 80% of infrastructure funding for new homes to the least affordable areas is set to change. The Paper suggests that a majority of the £1.8 billion brownfield funding will be focused on the redevelopment of brownfield sites in the North and Midlands – with the Metro Mayors to be allocated £120 million from this pot. This may well impact on London’s development pipeline.
In addition to this, increases in funding for R&D appear to be focused on areas outside of London and the South East, alongside additional funding for culture.
While no new funding has been announced for London as of yet, this is the case across the country. And London is to be included in the offer of more powers and ‘deeper devolution’. The Government will invite the GLA to bid for sweeping further powers, through the new devolution framework
The White Paper provides an overview of projects currently underway that fall under the banner of Levelling Up. These include the Future High Streets funding for Woolwich, Tottenham and Old Kent Road, Community Renewal Funds for projects in Newham, Barking and Dagenham, and Brownfield Release Fund for Camden, Haringey and Sutton.
In a statement made just before the White Paper was published, the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, took the opportunity to raise the current funding issues facing Transport for London following the impact of COVID-19 on fair revenues.
“If the Government truly wants to show its commitment to levelling-up, it is also vital that it commits to properly funding the urban transport networks on which our towns and cities rely, including Transport for London (TfL). TfL has a critical role to play in driving the economic recovery in both the capital and the rest of the country, but has been severely affected by COVID. With just two days until the current funding agreement expires, any failure by Government to commit to a long term funding model allowing TfL to place orders with its suppliers around the UK would jeopardise the national recovery and put any meaningful levelling-up at risk.”
DLUHC, Government unveils levelling up plan that will transform UK
DLUHC, Levelling Up White Paper
Mayor of London, Mayor of London statement on Levelling Up White Paper
|
|
Quote of the month |
|
|
The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: “I am determined that our capital city plays its role in helping to level up parts of the country that have been left behind for too long - so I welcome the publication of this White Paper
Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan’s statement on the Levelling Up White PaperWhen London succeeds our whole country benefits – and vice-versa. That is why I want to work with the Government, other regions and business, to help level-up London and every other town, city and region in the UK. |
||
Judgement on London Plan’s tall-buildings policy
A High Court judgment has confirmed how London Plan Policy D9 on tall buildings should be interpreted, following a judicial review brought against the Mayor of London by the London Borough of Hillingdon.
The council’s challenge was made on three grounds in total. These were that the Mayor had misinterpreted the London Plan policy on tall buildings, not properly regarded information on air quality submitted by the council, and that there had been procedural unfairness in the way in which the application had been determined.
The council had originally refused the planning application for the 12 storey scheme in March 2020, citing concerns that the scale of the development was inappropriate and would have a negative impact on the character of the area. However, the application was called-in by the Mayor of London, who granted planning permission for the site in March 2021.
The proposed development would be located in an area not identified as being suitable for tall-buildings in the council’s development plan. This location was at odds Part B of Policy D9 of the London Plan, which requires councils to identify areas where tall buildings may be an appropriate form of development. Part B (3) goes on to state that ‘Tall buildings should only be developed in locations that are identified as suitable in Development Plans’.
While the Mayor had noted the proposal "did not fully accord with Policy D9, because it had not been identified as suitable in the development plan under Part B”, significant weight had been given to the fact that the development would comply with the other criteria in Policy D9, which set out a range of assessment criteria that seek to mitigate the impact of tall buildings. On balance the Mayor had found that the proposal “accorded with the provisions of the development plan when read as a whole".
The council argued that this approach was incorrect, however. Part A and Part B of Policy D9 of the London Plan gave primacy to the judgment of the local planning authority at the plan-making stage, allowing them to determine what constitutes a tall building and where tall buildings should be located. It argued:
“there is nothing in the wording or in the supporting text which suggests that the detailed criteria in Policy D9 Part C is to be used to assess the policy compliance of a development proposal that is not a tall building or not in a location identified as suitable. There is nothing that suggests that, through consideration of these "impacts", a decision-maker is entitled to reopen a borough's planning judgment on definition/applicability of the policy and or location.”
The Judge rejected this line of argument. A development did not need to comply with both Part A and Part B of the policy in order to be judged as against the detailed criteria in part C. In determining an application for planning permission, planning law dictates that the decision must be made in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise, and it is evident that a plan’s policies will often “pull in different directions”. The drafter of the Policy D9 would have been aware that the require of part B (3) might not always be followed if in their judgement this was outweighed by other policies in the development plan, or by material considerations.The Judge went on state:
“Whether to grant planning permission for a tall building which did not comply with paragraph B(3), because it was not identified in the development plan, it would surely be sensible, and in accordance with the objectives of Policy D9, for the proposal to be assessed by reference to the potential impacts which are listed in Part C”.
On the second ground, the council had argued that the Mayor failed to take into account the council’s air quality report The Judge accepted that the Mayor had not failed to consider these; the Hearing Report included comments made in the council’s air quality report, and while it did not analyse these in detail, “such reports should be read benevolently and without undue rigour”. It was held that the GLA officers and the Mayor had given sufficient regard to the issue of air quality.
On the final ground, the judge accepted the council’s argument that the defendant had acted in a way which was 'procedurally unfair and unlawful” by not providing an opportunity for the council to comment on a technical note produced by the applicant. While accepting this ground, the Judge refused to quash the planning permission, stating that the Mayor would have likely come to the same decision regardless of this procedural error.
The case provides a useful clarification of the interpretation of Policy D9. Where a proposal demonstrates that it is able to performs to a high standard when judged against all other criteria of the London Plan’s design policies, it is not critical that the site is not located in an area allocated for tall-buildings. More generally, this reinforces the conflict with some of the policies in a development will not necessarily result in conflict with the development plan when taken as a whole. Evidently, policies will often pull in different directions and the weight afforded to these is a matter of planning judgement.
R. (on the application of Hillingdon LBC) v Mayor of London
The Mayor is consulting on new guidance to support the delivery of Policy H16 of the London Plan; the policy applies specifically to large-scale purpose built shared living accommodation. The guidance is aimed at supporting planning authorities assess planning applications for shared-living schemes, such as the build to rent sector.
Policy H16 makes a number of requirements for shared living developments, ensuring developments are good quality and well-designed, contribute towards mixed and inclusive neighbourhoods, and are located in an area well-connected to local services. Other requirements relate to the provision of communal facilities and services, such as communal kitchens and indoor and outside amenity space, such as lounge areas and rooftop gardens.
The Mayor’s existing housing design standards and policies generally do not apply to shared living accommodation. This new guidance aims to provide greater certainty over what is expected, for example, active uses and public amenities should be designed and located to activate the street frontage on the ground floor. In terms of the internal arrangements, the guidance states that at least 5 sqm of essential internal communal facilities should be provided for every resident, this excludes laundry rooms, corridors and other ancillary living space.
A range of different spaces should be provided to cater for different activities, with some internal communal space to be located on each floor. The guidance says: “To foster a sense of community, communal kitchen facilities must be provided to accommodate at least 5 people per kitchen2 . The concentration of all communal cooking facilities into large communal kitchens in only a few locations in the building should be avoided.” This requires at least 0.6m of kitchen space and 0.5m of dining space to be provided for each resident.
The guidance also states there should be least 40 sqm of external communal space, with at least 1 sqm for each resident (balconies or terraces for individual units will not count towards the communal space requirement).
In addition to these points design related points, the guidance sets out advice on the contents of Management plans for shared-living schemes.
The consultation closes on 27 March 2022.
Further consultations are expected in the coming weeks; consultation on fire safety guidance and consultation on Good Quality Homes for all Londoners are expected to commence by mid-February.
Mayor of London, Purpose built shared living accommodation - London Plan draft guidance
Mayor sets out preferred pathway to reaching net-zero by 2030
The Mayor has set out his preferred strategy to reaching net-zero strategy in a new report. This sets out the key steps that London will need to make to reduce air pollution, tackle the climate emergency and cutting congestion in the capital to create a greener and healthier city.
The report explains the benefits and challenges of four potential pathways to reaching net-zero. The Accelerated Green pathway is the preferred option for London; this balances “ambition with deliverability” and replaces the previous trajectory in the 5°C Plan.
While the report covers a broad range of topics, several planning measures are presented as part of his vision, relating to both existing buildings and new developments. The headlines figures in the report propose:
- a 40 per cent reduction in the total heat demand of our buildings, requiring over 2 million homes and a quarter of a million non-domestic buildings to become properly insulated,
- 2 million heat pumps in operation in London by 2030, and
- 460,000 buildings connected to district heating networks by 2030.
To help improve the efficiency of buildings, it is suggested that planning policy could seek to monitor energy efficiency standards, and enforce these standards locally. Planning policy may also be reviewed to help support greater uptake of lower carbon heat sources, such as district networks and the use of heat pumps. Planning policy may also require that all new developments should use low-carbon heating systems from 2025.
It is also proposed that policy should better support the introduction of PV panels on rooftops, particularly for community energy projects.
Other measures suggested increased co-location of housing, services and employment uses in some areas to reduce travel, as well a measures to reduce the reduce traffic, potentially through changes to parking supply and pricing.
Mayor of London, Response to ‘Pathways to Net-Zero Carbon by 2030’ report
Definition of key worker broadened within planning guidance
The Mayor has published a new Housing Policy Practice Note on the allocation of intermediate homes to London’s keyworkers. Keyworker jobs are defined as roles considered essential to the everyday running of the city, such as care and education, as well as occupations that support public safety, transport and utilities.
The full list of roles listed reflects the Office for National Statistic’s occupation-based definition of key workers, with the addition of a number of additional roles following consultation with trade unions and other stakeholders.
The note encourages local authorities to prioritise the allocation of intermediate homes to key workers, using the GLA’s key worker definition. It encourages this definition to be used where setting policy and entering into s106 agreements for new developments.
Intermediate homes are defined as “affordable housing which is targeted at people who cannot afford to rent or buy a home that meets their needs on the open market, but are not likely to access low cost rent housing”. This includes:
- Shared ownership homes;
- Discount market rents and discount market sale homes at least 20% below open market equivalent home; and
- ‘London Living Rent’ rent for each London neighbourhood which relates to one-third of local median household income.
To be eligible for intermediate housing, incomes must remain below the income caps set out in the London Plan.
Allocation of key worker housing is set by boroughs rather than the Mayor. The proportion of working residents working in key worker occupations varies substantially from borough to borough from a low of 23.6 percent in Lambeth to a high of 35.9 percent in Brent.
The note states that the Mayor’s preferred intermediate tenure is shared ownership and London Living Rent. No reference is made to the Government’s new intermediate tenure, First Homes. In a statement published last year, the Mayor stated that in most areas of London, the delivery of other tenures should generally be prioritised.
Mayor of London, Allocating intermediate homes to London’s key workers
Mayor of London, Mayor’s new key worker list for priority housing
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