Development Control in The United Kingdom - Public Involvement in Development Control

Public Involvement in Development Control

The public have a right to be consulted before any planning application is decided by the LPA. Land owners immediately adjoining the application site are usually notified, a public notice may be posted in nearby streets, and sometimes a notice is published in the local press. Planning applications must be decided in a timely manner and only 21 days is normally allowed by law for the public to express their views. Planning applications can be viewed on the LPA’s website and comments can be submitted by email.

Most planning applications are decided by an authorised senior officer of the LPA - under what are known as "delegated powers". Only major or controversial applications are decided by elected councillors meeting as a "Planning Committee" of the authority concerned. The agenda of the committee meeting with a report by planning officers on each planning application is usually published at least five working days before the meeting. The report on any planning application should contain a description of the development, a fair summary of any public comments received, state the relevant planning policies which have a bearing on the decision and a discussion of the issues raised – all leading to a recommendation to either grant or refuse planning permission. The elected Planning Committee may act on the advice of their professional planning officers, or occasionally may take a different view.

Planning Committee members should vote to represent the interests of the whole community they represent, including those who will later live or work in any new development, rather than any narrower local view. The committee may refuse planning permission for development when their own professional planning officers have recommended that planning permission be granted, or allow an application that officers recommend should be refused.

Refusal of an application, whether by committee or under delegated powers, may be challenged by an appeal through the Planning Inspectorate. If officers had recommended the application, the LPA usually has to rely on the same officers to make the case to the Inspector against it. Objectors to a successful application have no right of appeal, except by a legal challenge to the courts, although for some significant applications (e.g. involving major policy matters) the Secretary of State may "call in" an application for review.

Subject to making arrangements in advance, many LPAs will invite applicants and members of the public to address the Planning Committee before making their decision. However, the Committee is "a meeting conducted in public", rather than "a public meeting"; although given an opportunity to speak at the outset of the meeting, members of the public will not be allowed to join in the committee's debate. There are a number of LPAs that still do not permit the public or the applicant to speak at the committee meeting at all.

There are often different views as to what constitutes “fairness” in deciding planning applications. Many public objections to new development are explicitly based on a perception of unfairness that developers and landowners should be allowed to profit, while near neighbours, the local environment or the community as a whole do not. More specific objections may also be given, but this apparent unfairness is the fundamental of many if not most public objections to new development. The process of development and re-development is seen as an immediate cost or inconvenience to those living nearby, and any benefits are invariably to the community as a whole, over a wider geographical area, and over time. The most obvious beneficiaries of any development are those who will later live or work within it but their views are not heard when a planning application is being decided. Even a well managed LPA, making decisions in light of published planning policies and after extensive public consultation, will still attract accusations of unfairness.

Unless a member of the public raises one or more material planning considerations which were not apparent beforehand, it is unusual for public views to override the relevant planning policies when the decision is made. The importance of public opinion is in adding flavour to the issues from the point of view of the decision maker. They can be especially important in deciding how much "weight" to give to different material considerations. Unpopular proposals often attract well orchestrated public opposition and it is not unusual for an LPA to receive multiple copies of the same pre-written letter of objection from a large number of people, or petitions with numerous signatures. It is not unknown for LPAs to receive letters of objection to a proposal with fake names and addresses in an effort to increase the level of apparent public opposition to a planning application. Some objectors to a development will also write to their Member of Parliament or to other people who are mistakenly believed to have influence over the outcome of a planning application but MPs will scrupulously avoid seeking to influence the proper functioning of a democratically elected LPA. Although members are democratically elected, they should not decide applications on the basis of strength of public opinion, but according to planning law; if there are no substantial planning grounds for refusing an application, a planning inspector at appeal could well order the LPA to pay costs.

The most effective method of influencing the outcome of a planning application is to make representations to one or more of the elected councillors who form the LPA, whose contact details are readily available on the LPA's website. Local councillors who are also members of the LPA’s Planning Committee may be reluctant to meet with applicants or members of the public in person in order to prevent subsequent allegations of bias or pre-determination when the Planning Committee comes to make a decision.

Elected Councillors who are Members of the Council's Planning Committee are subject to their Council's general Code of Conduct which requires them to register interests, declare personal interests and withdraw from the meeting if they have a prejudicial interest. As Members of the Planning Committee, however, they are subject to additional legal restrictions derived from the common law of bias. There have been several recent legal decisions on this and the present position (following the decision of the Court of Appeal in Persimmon Homes Teesside Limited v. Lewis 2008) is that whilst Members may have a predisposition to a view on a particular application, they must not have predetermined it in the sense that they come to the Planning Committee with their mind closed to the arguments of fellow members and the advice of the Officers. This causes difficulty, because members of the public, action groups etc. not only ask Councillors to listen to their views, but also try to persuade them to commit for or against a Planning Application without understanding that if they do so they will be precluded from voting at the Committee.

Most LPAs are receptive to public complaints and seek to learn from them. The great majority of public complaints about planning matters concern an alleged error in procedure, rather than the outcome of a permitted development as later built. A member of the public whose complaint is well founded and who has suffered genuine injury or injustice as a result of maladministration can pursue their complaint through the UK's Local Government Ombudsman.