APPENDICES TO THE MINUTES OF EVIDENCE
TAKEN BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT SUB-COMMITTEE
OF THE ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Supplementary Memorandum by The Planning
Inspectorate (TF 34(c))
You will recall that, in our initial response
of 14 February, to your letter of 1 February, we gave a short
statistical statement of the number of appeals involving travelling
showpeople over the last three years. We had identified 29 appeals,
comprising 18 planning appeals and 11 enforcement appeals.
You will appreciate that in view of the limited
time available and because of the crude nature of our database
our initial response was of necessity constrained. However, we
have now had time to analyse the appeals, contained within 20
decision letters. From this we have discovered that the original
figures we gave you were over-simplified. The matter is complicated
because any one decision letter, or document, may be about more
than one appeal. Each appeal might concern quite different, albeit
related, matters. Our statistical information does not always
distinguish accurately between cases. But in order to ensure that
the Sub-committee has accurate information about substantive cases,
we have now had the opportunity to analyse the decision letters
in a more sophisticated way. Within the 20 documents containing
decisions issued in the last three years, there are 29 substantive
cases (the total figure we originally gave). However, the breakdown
is slightly different from the information we gave before this
detailed analysis. We have now found that:
— Of 15 section 78 planning appeal
cases, 80 per cent were allowed (12) and only 20 per cent (three)
dismissed. This compares with a current average of 35 per cent
of all planning appeals being allowed.
— Of 14 section 174 enforcement appeal
cases, only two (14 per cent) were allowed, resulting in the notice
being quashed. This compares with the average 25 per cent total
success rate for all enforcement appeals. In the remaining 12,
the enforcement notice was upheld (although nine of these were
allowed to the limited extent of some variation being made, in
the appellants' favour, to the requirements or the period for
complying with them).
— Combining the 29 appeals gives an
overall success rate of 48 per cent, which is still significantly
higher than the section 78 average of 35 per cent and the enforcement
average of 25 per cent.
A copy of the analysis follows.
The marked difference between section 78 and
section 174 results is not accounted for by the different disciplines
of the Inspectors concerned. All are subject to the same policy
advice and internal training and guidance. Moreover, all enforcement
Inspectors are well-drilled in the rule that they give no weight
whatsoever (either for or against the appellant) to the fact that,
in enforcement appeals, the development will already have taken
place (which may or may not be the case in planning appeals).
The section 78 results show that Inspectors are evidently giving
significant weight to the general and personal needs of travelling
showmen, in line with the Circular, and in addition to purely
land-use planning considerations. But there is no reason to suppose
that Inspectors are giving any less weight to these needs in enforcement
cases. We suggest that the lower success rate rather indicates
that local planning authorities are heeding the Circular's advice,
including that in Planning Policy Guidance Note 18 concerning
the enforcement of planning control in respect of small businesses,
and only taking enforcement action as a last resort in the worst
cases. Viewed in this context, the enforcement figures are less
surprising.
We have approached the 19 Inspectors involved
in these cases, for their comments on the questions in the five
bullet points contained in your letter of 1 February. Once all
these have been received, I will be able to report on them when
appearing before the Sub-committee on 21 March.
Meanwhile, you also asked for some further analysis
of the above figures realting to the 29 substantive cases and
I hope the following is helpful:
TYPE OF
SITE
Of the 20 decision letters, it appears that
two, at most, concerned winter quarters confined to use in the
winter months only.
The vast majority (16) related to all-year-round
use, albeit usually at less intensity during the fair season.
We have not identified any cases specifically
concerning quarters for retired showpeople.
The remaining two letters involved showpeople,
but either turned on legal issues only, with no consideration
of the planning merits of the case, or did not involve Circular
22/91 issues as the appellant concerned was engaged in some other
activity.
AWARDS OF
COSTS
Out of 20 decision letters, applications for
awards of costs were made in six.
Costs claimed by appellants against local planning
authorities were refused in three cases and granted in two cases
(including the Bromsgrove case for which you have the decisions).
In the one case where costs were claimed by
the authority against the appellant, they were granted because
the appeal had gone over the same ground as an earlier appeal
relating to the same matter and there had been no intervening
change in the relevant circumstances.
GREEN BELT
Of the 20 decision letters, five related to
sites in the Green Belt (of which three were recovered for decision
by the Secretary of State on the ground that they raised important
issues of development control in the Green Belt).
In two of these five cases (both section 78
appeals) the appeals were allowed and conditional planning permission
granted (one by an Inspector and the other by the Secretary of
State in accordance with the Inspector's recommendation). These
are the Thurrock and Bromsgrove cases on which you already have
the letters.
In the remaining three of these five cases (including
one combining section 78 and section 174 appeals) the appeals
were dismissed (two by Secretary of State in accordance with the
Inspectors' recommendations and one by the Inspector).
CONDITIONS
Conditions were imposed in all 12 decision letters
where planning permissions were granted (including the Warrington,
Thurrock and Bromsgrove cases on which you have the letters).
In two cases seeking discharge of conditions
previously imposed, the conditions were discharged, with other,
less onerous conditions substituted. But one of these cases seeking
discharge of two conditions was only successful in respect of
one, while the other, limiting the use to winter rather than permanent
quarters, was upheld. This was one of the two cases we have identified
as involving winter quarters only.
ANALYSIS OF
DECISIONS
| LPA | Decision Letter date
| Appeal Ref APP/ | Costs
| Section 78 | Section 174
|
| | |
| Allowed | Dismissed
| Allowed | Dismissed
|
| Sandwell MBC | 1 October 1997
| G4620/A/97/280445 | | 1
| | | |
| Tewkesbury BC | 10 November 1997
| G1630/C/97/647413 | Costs awarded to Council
| | | | 1*
|
| Fylde BC | 18 November 1997 |
M2325/A/97/284400 | | 1
| | | |
| New Forest DC | 11th December 1997
| C/96/B1740/643520-22 and
B1760/A/96/265091
| Costs not awarded against Council | 1
| | 2 | 1 |
| West Dorset DC | 21 January 1998
| C/97/F1230/647802-04 | |
| | | 3*
|
| Guildford BC | 20 February 1998 Recovered case, decided by SSETR
| C/96/Y3615/644046
Y3615/A/96/269219 |
| | |
| 1 |
| Bridgnorth DC | 10 March 1998
| C/97/J3205/647331-2 | |
| | | 1 |
| Crawley BC | 23 April 1998 |
C/96/Q3820/642039;
Q3820/A/96/266789 | Costs not awarded against Council
| 1 | | | 1*
|
| Wealden DC | 29 May 1998 |
C1435/A/97/289578 | | 1
| | | |
| East Cambridgeshire DC | 12 June 1998
| C/97/V0510/647517-524 | Costs
| | | | 4*
|
| Chelmsford BC | 27 July 1998 |
W1525/A/98/293792 | |
| 1 | | |
| Winchester City | 8 October 1998
| L1765/A/98/297885 | |
| 1 | | |
| Thurrock BC | 9 October 1998 |
M1595/A/98/294890 | | 1
| | | |
| New Forest DC | 15 January 1999
| B1740/A/98/1011384 | | 1
| | | |
| Wigan MBC | 24 May 1999 Decision by SSETR
| V4250/A/98/300786 | |
| 1 | | |
| Doncaster MBC | 3 August 1999
| F4410/A/99/1023015 | | 1
| | | |
| Warrington BC | 29 September 1999
| M0655/A/99/1022065 | Costs awarded against Council
| 1 | | |
|
| Thurrock BC | 20 October 1999
| M1595/A/99/10254171 | | 1
| | | |
| Bromsgrove DC | 8 December 1999 decided by SSETR
| P1805/A/99/1024933 | Costs awarded against Council
| 1 | | |
|
| Winchester City | 13 December 1999
| L1765/A/99/1028677 | | 1
| | | |
| | | TOTALS
| 12 | 3 | 2 |
12 (of which 9 varied—marked with an *) |
| GRAND TOTAL 29 CASES |
| | | |
|
| | |
| 15 Section 78 cases | 14 Section 174 cases
|
| Allowed 14 (12 + 2) |
| | | |
|
| | |
| | | |
|
| Dismissed 15 (3 + 12) |
| | | |
|
| | |
| | | |
|
Chris Shepley
Chief Planning Inspector
March 2000
| | | |
| | | |
| 
