Agenda item

Councillor Butt, as Chair, welcomed Jules Pipe (Deputy Mayor Planning, Regeneration & Skills) to the meeting who had been invited to provide an overview on the current review of the London Plan.

Jules Pipe thanked the Board for inviting him to the meeting and began by reminding Members of the purpose of the London Plan which was designed not only to bring together the Mayor of London’s strategies relating to housing, transport, economic development and environment but also to provide an overarching spatial planning framework for each of the 33 London Boroughs Local Plans.

The draft London Plan would shortly be open to a 3 month formal consultation process, due to open on 29 November 17.  This would then be followed by a formal Examination in Public to be undertaken in Autumn 2018, with the Inspectors report anticipated in Spring 2019 prior to the final Plan then being submitted for formal approval and adoption in Summer 2019.

The draft Plan had been designed to provide a strategic focus on the key challenges faced across London with policies aimed at driving positive change and growth.  In response to feedback received, the Plan would contain more of a focus on planning issues and clarity around implementation than previous London Plans.  The aim had also been to make the document more accessible in order to increase engagement in the process for developing the Plan.

In terms of an overall approach the Mayor was keen to encourage more economically and, socially inclusive and environmentally sustainable growth with some of the key themes and policies highlighted as follows:

·                more positive view on the promotion of mixed use activity e.g. identification of industrial land and brownfield sites that could be better used for housing; examining options for housing and industrial activity to co-exist in certain locations with a focus on maintaining floor space capacity rather than the footprint of the original activity; relocation of industrial activity to more appropriate locations |(without seeking to disrupt the economy or erode the critical base of industrial land); support for safe tall buildings.

·                support for town centre developments and seeking to encourage housing developments adjacent to transport links with the intensification of housing development on TfL and other public land.

·                In terms of housing development the aim was to optimise density through a design led approach whilst also encouraging more smaller scale housing developments in appropriate locations.  Whilst continuing to collaborate with neighbouring authorities across the South East the aim would be to deliver the growth and new homes that London needed within the boundaries of London.  In addition the Plan would include the strategic target of 50% affordable housing with a commitment to review the current 35% threshold for viability with a view to increasing this in future..  At the same time there would be an aim to ensure that all new homes were of good design and quality which met the decent space standards.

·                Continued development within Opportunity and Intensification Areas but with these grouped, where possible into growth corridors.

·                In terms of the environment the focus on green growth would continue with a focus for example around clean air, maintaining access to green space and energy as well as promoting more sustainable and active travel including the “Healthy Streets” approach.  The focus on protection of the Green Belt and other designated green spaces would also be maintained.

·                Protection and development of London’s heritage and cultural infrastructure.

·                Maintaining the right conditions for business growth by supporting access to skills and employment opportunities and promoting creative enterprise and economic opportunities across London recognising that a good business environment would also rely on a clean and healthy urban environment.

Having outlined the consultation process, comments were then sought on the key areas outlined, with the following issues raised in the discussion that followed.

Members were supportive of the attempts being made to make the document more accessible and easier to engage with.  Whilst recognising that the document would be more prescriptive members also felt there was a need to recognise and respect the differences between inner and outer London particularly, as an example, in relation to parking standards given the more limited access to public transport links.  Members advised they would welcome further detail and clarification in the Plan relating to parking and infrastructure development requirements

Support was expressed for clarity around the requirements in relation to social infrastructure needed within developments, particularly in relation to health and educational provision with support for greater flexibility around proposals to encourage more mixed use of land that recognised the balance needing to be delivered in terms of associated community benefits.  In terms of industrial land sites, whilst it was planned to strengthen the restrictions on the loss of industrial space Jules Pipe highlighted that the Mayor would be willing to work with boroughs on proposals for less productive sites or those not recognised as strategically important (for those identified as strategically important there would be less scope for supply release and capacity would need to be reserved).

A query was also raised in relation to the position on the potential use of Metropolitan Open Land (MoL) for alternative community benefit use.  Whilst highlighting the Mayors commitment to protection of the Green Belt, Jules Pipe felt there may be scope in certain instances on previously developed MoL to consider alternative mixed uses, provided the principle of protecting MoL was achieved, for example through land swaps.

Members were supportive of the attempts being made to increase the target for the percentage of affordable housing included within any new build developments but were conscious, recognising the difficulties in achieving the existing target that this would need to be part of an ongoing process with developers and that took account of the existing grant funding mechanisms.

A need was also identified to recognise and manage concerns about the potential loss of further public assets given the focus of maximising the development potential of publicly owned land owned by TfL, NHS, Police etc

In terms of other key issues identified by the Board the Chair highlighted:

·                The desire to work with the Mayor in looking to find ways of accommodating both housing and employment land on the same space given the large number of sites across West London where housing and employment land were competing with each other.  It was recognised this would need to be in way that not only protected work space but that also provided the density needed to meet housing targets requiring a more subtle approach to SIL focussed more on the quality and quantity of employment space rather than the overall footprint and allowing, for example a multi-storey approach towards developments.

·                that the support of the Mayor would be valued in terms of progressing the on-going development with TfL of the West London Orbital Rail project given the potential to unlock significant housing development, regeneration and employment opportunities.  In addition it was felt the project would also contribute towards a reduction in congestion, pollution and in reducing pressure elsewhere on the transport network in line with the principles of “good growth”.

·                support for the Mayor to more proactively encourage and enable an intensification of over-station development on TfL land, particularly given the large number of sites across West London where this could unlock significant housing potential in relation to the Orbital Rail line.

·                the need for more flexibility in relation to the current London Plan Density Matrix, which was seen as currently preventing boroughs from taking a more locally focussed place making approach.

·                the need to establish and develop(working with sub regional skills and employment boards) a common, local understanding of the skills priorities for London in order to determine commissioning requirements designed to address local outcomes and ensure more effective use of funding beginning with a Joint Skills Strategy for London.

Jules Pipe advised he had noted the views expressed, which he felt had also highlighted the importance in developing a more Plan led approach towards the issues raised.

Councillor Butt, on behalf of the Board, thanked Jules Pipe for attending the meeting and the update provided and advised Members that the progress in developing the Draft Plan would continue to be monitored by the Board.  This would involve the preparation of a West London submission designed to reflect all aspects of the sub regional growth agenda.  Consideration of the submission had initially been scheduled for the Boards next meeting in November but this would need to be rescheduled to reflect that the Draft Plan was not due to be published for consultation until 29 Nov.