In a letter to a Bedfordshire Planning Authority, the Mayor has asked that they take account of the possibility that London may not be able to meet its housing needs within its boundary. Citing the Duty to Cooperate, the Mayor is asking the wider South East to consider how their housing markets are influenced by London and to consider taking account of London’s population growth in their evidence bases.
This is the first time the Mayor has admitted that the unprecedented population growth London is expected to experience over the next 20 years, may outstrip the supply of new homes. Unfortunately at a time when many authorities around the capital are struggling to accommodate their own local housing needs, meeting London’s unmet housing needs in addition to local needs is unlikely to be welcomed.
The current consultation on the London Plan states that London has a housing need of between 49,000 and 62,000 homes per annum over the 20 year period of the plan. However, the Mayor has set a housing target of 42,000 homes per annum. Although the expectation is that the 42,000 target is set as a minimum figure to be exceeded, history has shown that this does not happen. Therefore London is unlikely to meet its housing needs in line with the requirement of the National Planning Policy Framework.
The Mayor is therefore right to ask other Planning Authorities to help meet their needs, but as we know from the new National Planning Policy Guidance, the Duty to Cooperate is not a Duty to agree!
Previous examinations into the London Plan have accepted a gap between need and supply without requiring the Mayor to justify this beyond saying the Authorities surrounding London will pick up the housing needs. Having followed previous examinations, I have been surprised how little representation/concern was raised to this explanation. However, I believe the NPPF has changed this and I think the Mayor is realising this.
Hertfordshire is a good example for explaining my theory. Land Availability is not a constraint unique to London. Most, if not all, Hertfordshire authorities are Green Belt authorities. Green Belt is a significant constraint on housing supply and is politically an extremely sensitive issue. Authorities in Hertfordshire are vehemently opposed to the loss of Green Belt but to stand any chance of having their Local Plans found sound, some Green Belt release in inevitable. Unlike London, these Authorities cannot rely on neighbouring authorities to meet their housing needs. So the prospect of meeting London’s need, as well as their own, will be resisted. I suspect we will see a much more vocal opposition to the latest consultation draft on the London Plan.
So what are the Mayor’s options….? I am not an advocate of Green Belt release but to ensure the planning system is implemented fairly and equitably, the Mayor has no option but to review London’s Green Belt as a minimum to identify any opportunities to amend boundaries and release Green Belt for housing. The risk is an unsound London Plan. London’s housing land supply is based on the assumption of no Green Belt release to meet housing needs. London’s Green Belt could provide a useful resource to meet London’s own needs. The London Borough of Redbridge is exploring opportunities for releasing Green Belt, which demonstrates some recognition and need for reviewing London’s Green Belt.
This letter from the Mayor is a positive and pro active action but the response in my opinion is a foregone conclusion. London is on its own to meet its housing needs, like everyone else is…….
The Campaign For Town Planning by Neil Goldberg 