HL Deb 27 July 1972 vol 333 cc1494-9

3.19 p.m.

LORD AMULREE

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what planning permission has been given, or is under consideration, for the erection of buildings over 80 feet high within a quarter of a mile of the perimeter of any Royal Park in London.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (LORD SANDFORD)

My Lords, this is primarily a matter for the London borough councils as local planning authorities, though my right honourable friend has to be consulted about any proposed development which is within half a mile of a Royal Park or might

London Borough Location Type of Development Current Position
1. Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. 121–127 Kensington High Street. Hotel Permission granted.
2. City of Westminster 61–69 Victoria Street Hotel, flats, shops Permission granted.
3. City of Westminster Army and Navy Stores, Victoria Street. Shops, offices, residential. Permission granted.
4. City of Westminster Victoria Street/Carlisle Place. Offices Application under consideration.
5. City of Westminster Windsor House/Iddesleigh House, Victoria Street. Offices, shops, residential. Permission granted.
6. City of Westminster 21–59 Victoria Street Offices, shops Application under consideration.
7. City of Westminster 117A–169A Victoria Street Offices, shops Permission granted.
8. City of Westminster Buckingham Gate/Palmer Street/Caxon Street. Offices, residential Permission granted.
9. City of Westminster 1–7 Rutland Gate Offices, Cultural Institute. 2 applications under consideration (by Secretary of State).
10. City of Westminster Park Road/Lodge Road Hotel, flats Permission granted.
11. City of Westminster 6 Princes Gate Offices Permission granted.
12. City of Westminster 34–5 Prince Albert Road Flats Permission granted.
13. City of Westminster 75 Prince Albert Road Flats Permission granted.
14. City of Westminster Bayswater Road/Lancaster Gate/Elms Mews. Hotel Permisison granted.
15. City of Westminster Park Road Mosque Application under consideration (by Secretary of State).
LORD AMULREE

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord for that reply. May I ask whether he is aware of the statement made by the chairman of the Royal Institute of British Architects the other day, that there are about 30 examples of planning permissions which have been given pending the falling-in of the leases on the latter property, and that when the leases fall-in it will be possible to proceed with the building without any further bother?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I am aware of the correspondence, but I do not know the source of the chairman's information. I should be glad to be told of it. As regards unused planning permissions, any development for which permission was granted before April 1, 1969, must be begun before April 1, affect the amenities of the Park. Since June, 1970, he has been consulted about some twenty proposals for buildings over 80 feet in height and within a quarter of a mile of a Royal Park. I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT details of the 15 of those for which planning permission has been granted or which are the subject of a current application. Six of these relate to proposals for the redevelopment of Victoria Street.

Following is the information referred to:

1974, if the permission is not to expire. A time limit is generally imposed on new permissions granted since April 1, 1969. The effect of these provisions generally is that there cannot now be a substantial time lag between the granting of permission and the start of building.

LORD REIGATE

My Lords, my noble friend carefully said "since June, 1970". Can he tell us how many more skycrapers are "in the pipeline" which were afforded permission before June, 1970?

LORD SANDFORD

Not without notice, my Lords, and a very considerable amount of research. I thought it necessary to draw the line in answer to the noble Lord's first question; but if noble Lords want to press me further within the bounds of what is reasonable I will attempt to answer further questions.

BARONESS LEE OF ASHERIDGE

My Lords, have we not reached a time when there ought to be less confusion and when we should know more simply where authority lies? Would not the Minister agree that if any future Ministers should agree to a Hilton Hotel or a Knightsbridge Barracks their heads should be for the chopper? Unless we can get much more clarity here, shall we not have the same old game of bat and ball between central and local government?

LORD SANDFORD

No, my Lords, I would not agree that there is any confusion about this. The General Development Order is quite clear. Local planning authorities are required to consult the Secretary of State before granting planning permission for the development of land which is within two miles of Windsor Castle, Windsor Great Park, Windsor Home Park, or within half a mile of any other Royal Palace or Park, or which might affect the amenities of the Parks.

LORD BERNSTEIN

My Lords, would the noble Lord be good enough to inquire from the Canadian Government how they dealt with the problem of their capital, Ottawa; and how they protected the areas around Government buildings? They appointed a commission many years ago, and no building may be erected now without the approval of this commission; and there is a public announcement prior to approval of the planning.

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I should be interested to look into that point.

LORD REIGATE

My Lords, has not the time now come when this matter should be taken out of the hands of the Westminster City Council? As regards the centre of capital cities, this has been done not only in Ottawa but with far longer precedence in Washington, D.C.

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, that raises wider issues on which I will not comment without notice.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

My Lords, why is it only those areas within the precincts of Government buildings that should be protected? Is it not a fact that such hideous buildings are now being erected that there should be general control over these architects, and the Government should ask all local authorities to submit their major schemes to them before they are perpetrated?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, we are getting on to quite a different topic—also a very important one. This is an area in which the role of the Royal Fine Art Commission comes in and I ought not to deal with this without a further Question being put down.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, is it not true that the result of leaving this very important matter of planning to the borough councils is that the character of London is being converted into an ugly monstrosity? Ought there not to be greater co-ordination among borough councils, possibly leading to some exercise of control by a Government Department, or even by the Greater London Council?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I think the most recent experience was with Piccadilly Circus and that indicated that in the case of an important site my right honourable friend is ready to call in an application for his own consideration.

LORD LEATHERLAND

My Lords, is the noble Lord going to reply to his noble friend behind him who asked about the number of skyscrapers in pipelines? Does he not think that pushing skyscrapers through pipelines is something of an unfair industrial practice?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, the Question I have to answer is the original one about Royal Parks.

LORD BURNTWOOD

My Lords, will the Minister be very cautious when questions of taste and design are raised about new buildings? Will he remember that when Buckingham Palace was first erected it was considered to be absolutely ghastly and unlikely to be tenanted by any decent monarch?

A NOBLE LORD

Well?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I have learned over the last two years to be very cautious on these matters.

LORD PARGITER

My Lords, would not the Minister agree that it is unfortunate that planning should be fragmented to the extent that it is?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I do not agree that planning is fragmented.

LORD PLATT

My Lords, would not the Minister agree that it is time we joined the European Economic Community and did not imitate New York?