As part of the raft of measures today , Gove has published the KitKat review, nearly a month after receiving it.
No one disputes that London is experiencing a significant housing crisis. Over the long term, the supply of new homes has not kept pace with increases in jobs, population and housing demand. The current London Plan sets a capacity-based ten-year target of 52,300 homes each year from 2019/20 to 2028/29, within a context of its assessment of need of around 66,000 homes per annum. 3 Four years into that ten-year period, when measured against the cumulative target, there has been an undersupply of more than 60,000 homes, more than a year of equivalent supply…
Public and private sector stakeholders are clear in their view that the London Plan is not the sole source of the problem: wider macro-economic conditions; fire safety; infrastructure constraints; statutory consultees; viability difficulties; and planning resourcing pressures have all contributed. 8 However, there is persuasive evidence that the combined effect of the multiplicity of policies in the London Plan now works to frustrate rather than facilitate the delivery of new homes, not least in creating very real challenges to the viability of schemes. We heard that policy goals in the Plan are being incorrectly applied mechanistically as absolute requirements: as ‘musts’ rather than ‘shoulds’.
What is missing from the London Plan is a policy mechanism to assist applicants and decisionmakers in navigating a path that aligns with the intended goal of boosting housing supply to the level outlined in the London Plan strategy.
It recommends the following policy – which appears to not go beyond (except for SIL) proposed national policy
The Presumption For qualifying local planning authorities, there is a strong presumption in favour of granting planning permission for proposals which comprise or include residential development on Brownfield (Previously developed) land. Qualifying local planning authorities are those where the net housing completions since 2019/20 have fallen below the cumulative annualised total of their Table 4.1 ten-year target. The presumption does not apply to sites which are in the Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land or a Strategic Industrial Location. In the case of proposals which would cause harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, the presumption only applies where any such harm is clearly outweighed by the public benefits of the proposals. Where it applies, the presumption means granting planning permission as quickly as possible unless the benefits of doing so would be significantly and demonstrably outweighed by any adverse impacts which would arise from not according with policies in this plan. In applying the presumption substantial weight is to be given to the benefits of delivering homes.
The report is deplyb dissapointing and appears to have completely ignored its brief
‘The expert advisers will assess whether there are specific changes to London Plan policies that could facilitate urban brownfield regeneration in London for housing delivery in an appropriate manner and, if necessary, recommend changes to the London Plan accordingly.’
The recommendations are procedural not policy, and concern national policy more than local policy. There is not a single analysis of a single London Plan policy, underlying the rushed and political nature of the review designed to conceal the aspect of the fall in housebuilding due to the cuts in government affordable housing expenditure, rushed out before mayoral election purdah.
Decisions, Decisions, Decisions 