The Gazette 1975

Planning

Control Lecture

Address by Mr. Gordon Hyde of Enfield, Middlesex and

Chairman of the Standing Committee of The Law-

Society on Town and Country Planning.

lie talk this evening is on the topical subject of

j ublic Participation in Town and Country Planning',

-«leal Planning Authorities in England (and in your

ntry) who have the power of deciding on planning

Pplication.s for planning perniissidn have to make such

Visions within the terms prescribed by the Acts of

lianicnt creating the power.-The powers of such

Authorities in planning matters include the power (in

t the rlnr\-1 m nm**.-,™

•

..mi*

show

duty) to prepare pland covering their areas

ing proposals for development. The plans, which

^tiniatcly require sanction from the Secretary of State

"r the Department of the Environment, are known as

Cve

tepment Plans. Development Plans generally re-

to the area of the Local Authority responsible for

'r preparation but they are based on regional and

''ational strategies. Such strategies are formulated and

Promulgated by Central Government.

I he Town and Country Planning Acts require that

applications for planning permission have to be decided

V reference to the provisions of the Development

n and any other material consideration. It follows

f the powers of Local Planning Authorities in

hiding

s u c

| , applications are limited in the wav

'•«scribed. This means that in applying their minds

planning application members of a local Planning

• uthority cannot decide the application by taking •

n t 0

account matters irrelevant to the Authority's

n c t

' °

as a Planning Authority. A recent example

g this is the English case of the

R. v. the London

ough

of Hillingdon ex parte Royco Homes Limited

^ (1974) 2 All. E. R. 643 which has caused a certain

"mount of excitement to constitutional and planning

yers. It appears that the Council of the

>ndon Borough of Hillingdon, as local Planning

mority, granted planning permission for residential

j ^ t e p m e n t of land owned by private developers but

•J doing so attached conditions to the planning consent

h were designed to restrict the usefulness of the

^mi s s i on

t o

local Authority type houses and to ensure

a t

the houses could only be occupied by Local

^ t ho r i ty tenants. On an application to the High

j.°!

,rt

instigated by the developers the offending con-

'hon

e r e

hg jj

t o

t r a y

r e s a n c

i e

p i

a n n

Permission was quashed. The Lord Chief Justice said

e dec

ision "was a fundamental departure from the

jjmts of ownership and it was so unreasonable that no

? - Authority, appreciating its duty and properly

y,n

S itself to the facts, could have reached it".

*vin -

C a s e ls a n e x a m

p i

e o f t , i e wa

t , i a t t l i e c

° u r t s

its

l n t e r f e r e

Planning Authority that exceeds

is ^ ^

- In the more usual case, where the decision

W , t

l i n

the prescribed powers of the Planning Author,

a d

Pplicant does have a right of appeal against

Stat

'°

n- S u c h a n a

e a l l i es t o t , i e

SerreteD'

o f

C a r

°r the Department of the Environment. It

n e

s with it the right to be heard Ijefore a person *

appointed by the Secretary of State which means,

as we shall see, a local — and public — Inquiry.

Decisions on planning applications are based

on Development Plans and these, although pre-

pared by Local Planning Authorities, owe their origin

from regional strategy formulated by Central Govern-

ment. As the ultimate right of appeal also lies to

Central ( lovernment it looks as if Town and Countrv

Planning in England begins and ends in Whitehall.

This is of course far removed from the concept of

planning being a locally administered function.

Dealing with the question of whether planning

decisions arc effectively made locally I think the

answer is that they are. Whether or not, however, such

decisions arc made by the local representatives of the

people is a different matter. The decision on a planning

application must be given within the now familiar

limits specified in the Act i.e. in accordance with the

provisions of the Development Plan or other material

considerations.

Planning Proposals must conform with the Development

Plan

In deciding a planning application the Lay Coun-

cillor will need the guidance of the professionally

qualified employees of the Authority who, apart from

anything else, will have prepared the plan on which

decisions arc given. The Councillor will be told whether

in the opinion of the officials a particular proposal

passes the first test of being in accordance with the

pdovisions of the Development Plan and should there-

fore be acceptable in principle. In most cases that it

not a difficult decision if it merely means checking

the Development Plan and the zoning pf the area. I was

involved in a case of a plan for a complete residential

development of an undeveloped site which was zoned

on the Town Map as being available for that purpose.

The plan finally submitted to the Planning Committee

had been the subject of detailed and tedious negoti-

ations with the officials for rather more than six months

until finally a scheme had been produced which was

considered satisfactory. By satisfactory I mean that it

had passed the various tests applied to it by the differ-

ent experts who considered it. This covered such matters

as garage accommodation, design, size of gardens,

density of development and proximity to the nearby

trunk road. When the result of all this activity came

before the Planning Committee accompanied by a

recommendation, not surprising in view of the history,

by the officials for approval the application was in fact

rejected. The Planning Committee met in public and on

the following day the local press reported that mem-

bers of the Committee had looked aghast at this com-

prehensive plan and described some of the proposed

houses as looking more like rabbit hutches than houses.

The developer came to seek my advice. He said that

he had commissioned his Architects to leave no stone

unturned to ensure a scheme which had the approval

of all the officials so that there would be no delay

arising from a planning refusal and subsequent appeal