London Plan 2011 PDF 1 MB - Lambeth Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The London Plan July 2011 – RTF version satisfactory levels of local provision to address areas of deficiency. Planning decisions B The loss of local protected open spaces must be resisted unless equivalent or better quality provision is made within the local catchment area. Replacement of one type of open space with another is unacceptable unless an up to date needs assessment shows that this would be appropriate. LDF preparation C When assessing local open space needs LDFs should: a include appropriate designations and policies for the protection of local open space b identify areas of public open space deficiency, using the open space categorisation set out in Table 7.2 as a benchmark for all the different types of open space identified therein c ensure that future open space needs are planned for in areas with the potential for substantial change such as opportunity areas, regeneration areas, intensification areas and other local areas. d ensure that open space needs are planned in accordance with green infrastructure strategies to deliver multiple benefits. D Use the CABE Space/Mayor of London Best Practice Guidance ‘Open Space Strategies’ as guidance for developing policies on the proactive creation, enhancement and management of open space. 7.57 As part of London’s multifunctional green infrastructure, local open spaces are key to many issues, such as health and biodiversity. Needs assessments can be part of existing borough strategies on issues such as allotments, play, trees and playing pitches and the preparation of an open space strategy will need to bring together the outputs of these borough strategies. The categorisation of open space in Table 7.2 provides a benchmark for boroughs to assess their own provision for the different categories of open space found throughout London. These standards can be used to highlight areas of open space deficiency and to facilitate cross-borough planning and management of open space. The London Parks and Green Spaces Forum can provide a useful mechanism to support this co-ordination. Cross-borough boundary planning is particularly relevant for the larger metropolitan and regional parks and for facilities such as playing pitches, where a sub-regional approach to planning is recommended. 7.58 The value of green infrastructure not designated as local open space is considered to be a material consideration that needs to be taken into account in the planning process. These values are set out in Policy 2.18 on green infrastructure. POLICY 7.19 BIODIVERSITY AND ACCESS TO NATURE Strategic A The Mayor will work with all relevant partners to ensure a proactive approach to the protection, enhancement, creation, promotion and management of biodiversity in support of the Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy. This means planning for nature from the beginning of the development process and taking opportunities for positive gains for nature Page 230 of 310
The London Plan July 2011 – RTF version through the layout, design and materials of development proposals and appropriate biodiversity action plans. B Any proposals promoted or brought forward by the London Plan will not adversely affect the integrity of any European site of nature conservation importance (to include special areas of conservation (SACs), special protection areas (SPAs), Ramsar, proposed and candidate sites) either alone or in combination with other plans and projects. Whilst all development proposals must address this policy, it is of particular importance when considering the following policies within the London Plan: 1.1, 2.1-2.17, 3.1, 3.3, 5.14, 5.15, 5.17, 5.20, 6.3, 7.14, 7.15, 7.25 and 7.26. Whilst all opportunity and intensification areas must address the policy in general, specific locations requiring consideration are referenced in Annex 1. Planning decisions C Development Proposals should: a wherever possible, make a positive contribution to the protection, enhancement, creation and management of biodiversity b prioritise assisting in achieving targets in biodiversity action plans (BAPs), set out in Table 7.3, and/or improving access to nature in areas deficient in accessible wildlife sites c not adversely effect the integrity of European sites and be resisted where they have significant adverse impact on European or nationally designated sites or on the population or conservation status of a protected species or a priority species or habitat identified in a UK, London or appropriate regional BAP or borough BAP. D On Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation development proposals should: a give the highest protection to sites with existing or proposed international designations 159 (SACs, SPAs, Ramsar sites) and national designations 160 (SSSIs, NNRs) in line with the relevant EU and UK guidance and regulations b give strong protection to sites of metropolitan importance for nature conservation (SMIs). These are sites jointly identified by the Mayor and boroughs as having strategic nature conservation importance c give sites of borough and local importance for nature conservation the level of protection commensurate with their importance. E When considering proposals that would affect directly, indirectly or cumulatively a site of recognised nature conservation interest, the following hierarchy will apply: 1 avoid adverse impact to the biodiversity interest 2 minimize impact and seek mitigation 3 only in exceptional cases where the benefits of the proposal clearly outweigh the biodiversity impacts, seek appropriate compensation. LDF preparation 159 Designated under European Union Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds (79/409/EEC) 1992, European Union Council Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (92/43/EEC) 1992 and Ramsar Convention on wetlands of international importance especially as waterfowl habitat 1971 160 Designated under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended by the Countryside Rights of Way Act 2000 Page 231 of 310
Page 1 and 2:
The London Plan July 2011 - RTF ver
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
2 LONDON’S PLACES The London Plan
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
4 LONDON’S ECONOMY The London Pla
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180: The London Plan July 2011 - RTF ver
Page 229: The London Plan July 2011 - RTF ver
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
show all

London Plan 2011 PDF 1 MB - Lambeth Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?