On the 09 December 2019, the Mayor of London issued the Intend to Publish Version of the draft London Plan to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government for approval.
This latest version of the Plan directly responds to the recommendations of the Panel, of which the Mayor accepted 28 in full, 10 in part/with amendment and rejected 15. Key issues that remain contested are on Green Belt and industrial land, whilst the approach to small sites and housing appears to have broadly been agreed.
On Green Belt, the Mayor chose to defend his position that the draft policy on Green Belt (which essentially offers total protection) is consistent with National guidance. He also rejected wording that would commit London to a strategic Green Belt review as part of the preparation for the next London Plan on the basis that it would ‘potentially prejudge any future spatial strategy’ and should only be done ‘as part of a comprehensive strategic appraisal of London’s spatial development options’.
Perhaps a missed opportunity, as that was exactly what this Plan should have done. On the evidence that is available, the Inspector recommended a commitment to a strategic Green Belt review in order inform a comprehensive strategic appraisal. Therefore, not committing to one only seems to be kicking the can further down the road.
The Mayor also defended his policy approach to the management of industrial land, stating that guiding boroughs to focus on limited release, maintenance of existing capacity or provision of additional capacity is a balanced and robust approach that would give the Boroughs a strategic steer when producing local plans. The target is for no net loss across London, so where land is released in some areas to accommodate other uses such as housing, it is expected to be gained or intensified elsewhere. The approach will be on a plan-led or masterplan basis, not adhoc, and the Mayor has remained firm that this is a positively prepared and justified approach.
The Mayor largely accepted the recommendations on small sites targets, causing a big drop in the overall housing target across London, mainly in the outer boroughs. The policy remains supportive of the principle of speeding up and supporting small housing development in accessible locations, but the ambitions of the policy have been severely dented. This has led to an acceptance from the Mayor that ‘the Plan does not meet all of London’s identified development needs’.
The response from the Secretary of State was originally due back in January, but this was formally extended and the Mayor is now expecting a response on the 17 February 2020. The Mayor is still anticipating that it will be able to publish the final version of the Plan before the pre-election period, which would mean adoption on or before the 20 March 2020. However, this obviously relies on the content of the Secretary of State’s response and if there are complicated or irreconcilable differences, then it will inevitably push back the intended adoption date. If the Mayor accepts the intervention of the Secretary of State, then he has to formally confirm in writing.
It is worth noting that the Secretary of State does have the power to go further and propose interventions beyond the issues of disagreement between the Mayor and the Panel. At the London Assembly meeting on the 23 January 2020, Jules Pipe, Deputy Mayor for Planning, Regeneration and Skills, stated that the Mayor has not yet received any direction from the Secretary of State’s office above the most ‘informal contact from officers to officers’. Therefore, we can only speculate on how the Plan may progress.