Agenda item

Report DRR13/082

When adopted, Bromley’s Local Plan would guide development in the Borough for the next 15-20 years and together with the London Plan, would form the development plan for the Borough.

Members considered a summary of the consultation undertaken for the Local Plan ‘Options and Preferred Strategy’ stage together with responses received and the next steps to be taken.  Particular attention was given to the ‘soundness’ and ‘general conformity’ of the Local Plan with the National Planning Policy Framework and the London Plan.

The Chairman expressed his disappointment that the consultation had been responded to more by third parties whose responses related to areas of concern within their specific fields of expertise.  Responses received from residents largely supported the Strategy.

The majority of residents did not agree with the GLA and a number of developers who called for a review on the release of Green Belt land.  The Chairman urged the Council to adhere to the current system of permitting the release of Green Belt land only in cases where exceptional circumstances for doing so were proven. 

Residents considered that the current provision of gypsy and traveller sites within the Borough should be maintained.

Councillor Fawthrop conveyed his displeasure that planning applications which had already received permission were not taken into consideration when housing targets were set by the GLA.  He continued to say that house building had declined since targets were introduced and that Government and Socialist interference did not aid the situation. 

Referring to the GLA's view that the option for parking did not conform with the London Plan, Councillor Fawthrop believed it was the London Plan which did not conform with Government opinion.  Whilst the Chairman considered that the option for minimum parking should be maintained, Councillor Fookes believed an increase in parking provision was required.

Councillor Michael was in favour of retaining the housing target of 470 units and advised the Council to inform the GLA that an increased target would have a significant impact on the character and openness of the Borough and that a distinction between inner and outer London should be made.  Councillor Fookes suggested that 500 units would be a more realistic target.

Councillor Michael also urged the Council to make it clear that Green Belt land characterised the openness of the Borough and barred against urban sprawl.  The release of Green Belt land should not, therfore, be permitted.

Referring to the GLA's comments (page 17, paragraph 3.4.7), that a higher density could be achieved in outer London locations in ‘sensitive ways’, Councillor Ince stated that areas of local character were, by their very nature, low density areas.  He queried what the GLA meant by the word 'sensitive'. 

Commenting on the options for Gypsies and Tavellers (page 29), Councillor Mrs Manning queried why the Showmens site in King Henry's Drive was no longer used when there was a clear demand for sites.  The Head of Planning and Strategy Projects believed the site was not specifically for gypsies and travellers but agreed to look into the matter further and report back to Councillor Mrs Manning.

Councillor Dykes was concerned with the loss of office space through change of use to living space.  Referring to the economic recession and its impact on businesses over the past few years, Councillor Joel was confident that the current lack of office occupation would improve in time.

Councillor Mellor was concerned at the desperate shortage of commercial land within the Borough and was vehemently opposed to the change of office use for the reason that office buildings were not suitable for conversion to residential accommodation.  Councillor Ince stated that the local authority should retain its ability to decide whether or not permission for conversion should be granted.

Councillor Papworth referred to the soaring costs of house prices and the benefits captured by developers.  He emphasised the need to establish a support system for younger residents who were currently required to save for approximately 10-15 years in order to accumulate enough money for a deposit to buy a house with a mortgage costing 10 times their salaries.

Councillor Fawthrop drew attention to the double standards of the current housing supply system where developers provided social housing consisting of confined living space with no gardens however they reaped all the benefits by providing private accommodation for people who could afford bigger and better things.

Councillor Smith said that whilst there was a shortage of housing in some areas, there was actually an over-supply in others.

RESOLVED that the preferred options be progressed to develop draft policies and site allocations, with key issues and areas of potential non-conformity with the London Plan brought back to the LDFAP and DCC for further discussion.