This week, Boris Johnson published a trio of interlinked documents setting out the consultation on the Draft London Plan, the Transport Strategy and the Economic Development Strategy for London.
The Draft London Plan is intended to reflect the changed status of planning and development since the first London Plan was published, a well as reflecting some of the priorities of the current Mayor. Critically, the Mayor has considerably more power than when the first London Plan was published, there is a new Homes and Communities Agency, the Infrastructure Planning Commission is shortly to start accepting applications and the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy is expected to come into effect next year. Added to this, the global economic situation has placed renewed pressure on London as a financial centre and the countdown to the Olympics has begun in earnest and London is under international scrutiny to demonstrate that it is ready, (willing??) and able to host the Games in 2012. Perhaps more important than the Games themselves is the need to create a post-Olympic legacy which succeeds in actual lasting regeneration of East London and improved life opportunities – it is this which seems to have troubled the Mayor and the various agencies involved in delivering the Olympic legacy.
In the event, the Plan is rather lightweight and seems to focus on aspiration more than firm structure (Boris does indeed promise to focus more on the vision than policy and structure). Although pledging to develop a more straight-forward and user-friendly Plan, the document is somewhat opaque with a distinct absence of figures and firm policy which leaves it widely open to interpretation which may well help some boroughs and hinder others leaving them open to greater input from the Mayor during planning processes.
In areas such as the Isle of Dogs, the Plan highlights the need for development to be able to take place without strategic constraints, to increase office floor space and to develop a mix of housing (perhaps influenced by the recent tussle between Boris and Tower Hamlets over Columbus tower). In the Central Activities Zone there is an intention to continue to support development and reduce constraints whilst encouraging mixed-use development. There are also plans to develop a specific planning framework for the West End Special Retail Policy Area and to support the other ‘clusters’ such as Harley Street and Theatreland. Added to this, there is a more positive environment for tall buildings than was first anticipated with a focus on clustering, demonstrating a mix of uses and conforming to high standards of design and architecture.
Under pressure from international organisations, the Plan stresses the need to respect and enhance the setting of the World Heritage Sites across the capital. The Plan also indicates that strategic views will be kept under review and will potential include ’strategically important landmarks’ as well in the future.
The Plan also highlights the need for LDFs to include detailed policies and proposals for Opportunity Areas and Intensification Areas taking into account the drive towards partnership working and wider regeneration principles. The Plan also gives scope for ‘health check’ reviews of town centres to create greater flexibility, allow for redesignation and ensure that town centres remain a focus on investment. There is also an emphasis on using S106 payments to provide support for small and independent retailers in town centres – another of Boris’s early policy commitments.
On housing, the Mayor will seek to provide an annual average of at least 33,400 homes – specifically pointing out that it is not reasonable or practical to simply seek to translate national targets and policies to London due to distinct pressures and ‘land churn’. Contrary to original statements, the Plan sets out specific targets for each borough although there is flexibility in the approach and the 50% target for affordable housing is to be dropped and replaced with a flexible policy that ’seeks to maximise’ affordable housing provision with an average target of at least 13,200 more affordable homes per year in the capital – so effectively retains a target at actually quite a high level of 40%, something of a backtrack from the previous position of allowing boroughs to make their own decisions. It also encourages Boroughs to seek affordable housing on developments below the threshold of 10 units where possible. It is interesting what a year of practical experience does… As expected, there is also a minimum space standard for all types of residential dwelling which is likely to put pressures on densities and will almost certainly stimulate significant debate over economic viability issues.
The Plan continue Boris’s stance of opposing expansion at Heathrow but doesn’t reiterate his desire to have an airport in the Thames Estuary – although building your way out of a recession maybe shouldn’t be ruled out… The transport strategy is of interest as it appears to hint at the potential for road-charging – something Boris recently ruled out – it also focuses on upgrades and extensions to the tube network, improvements to buses, better cycle networks etc. The funding of this is left somewhat in question.
There is significant attention paid to measures to reduce the impact of climate change, manage resources and energy and minimise waste. There is an intent for retrofitting of carbon neutral technologies where relevant but the majority of the emphasis is on developers to ensure compliance with ever higher targets. All major development proposals will be expected to include green roofs, urban drainage, biodiversity, accessibility to roof space, ability for households to grow food etc. A draft Climate Change and Energy Strategy will be published in due course.
In terms of S106, there is a clear focus on the Crossrail Levy, although it is anticipated that London will become the charging authority for the CIL when this is introduced which will change the structure of S106 and may well remove much of the power of local authorities to secure funds from developers except for very specific local mitigation measures.
In all, the Draft London Plan reads very much as an aspiration for a utopian city, which is ultimately the aim, but exactly how this will be delivered is not clear. There is much emphasis on proactive cross-borough working, partnership approach with the private sector etc. However, the reality is that much of this does not translate into reality as a combination of factors, not least politics, creates a continually uncertain development environment. Given the overarching national bodies/policies – HCA, IPC, CIL and the Olympics, there is much which the London Plan cannot govern in practice. However, to an extent, the relative lack of dramatic change in the Draft Plan will provide comfort to an industry in a semi-constant state of flux and may begin to add more certainty in the planning process when dealing with the GLA.
The consultation closes on 12th January. We will keep you updated.
Written by Stephen Byfield