§ Mr. Knoxasked the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what information he has as to the proportion of full planning appeals against decisions by
Table 1 1984 planning appeals decided and allowed against decisions of planning authorities in Staffordshire and the Peak Park planning board Number of appeals determined following a local public inquiry Number of appeals determined under the written representations procedure Number of appeals determined under the informal hearing procedure Total number of appeals Planning authority Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Staffordshire County Council — — 3 0 — — 3 0 Cannock Chase District Council 4 2 6 2 1 — ll 4 East Staffordshire District Council 3 2 11 3 1 — 15 5 Lichfield District Council 2 — 26 12 — — 28 12 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council 3 1 28 9 — — 31 10 South Staffordshire District Council 10 4 24 5 2 — 36 9 Stafford Borough Council 13 5 27 7 3 1 43 13 Staffordshire Moorlands District Council 3 1 23 9 1 — 27 10 Stoke on Trent City Council — — 27 5 — — 27 5 Tamworth Borough Council 2 1 1 — — — 3 1 Peak Park Planning Board 4 1 16 5 — — 20 6
38W
Table 2 1985 planning appeals decided and allowed against decisions of planning authorities in Staffordshire and the Peak Park planning board Planning authority Number of appeals determined following a local public inquiry Number of appeals determined under the written representations procedure Number of appeals determined under the informal hearing procedure Total number of appeals Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Staffordshire County Council 1 1 1 1 — — 2 2 Cannock Chase District Council 1 — 17 9 1 1 19 10 East Staffordshire District Council 2 1 20 6 1 1 23 8 Lichfield District Council 5 2 34 11 1 1 40 14 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council 6 3 31 14 2 1 39 18 South Staffordshire District Council 8 6 21 9 2 1 31 16 Stafford Borough Council 10 5 42 17 — — 52 22 each of the planning authorities in Staffordshire and by the Peak Park planning board which were decided in favour of the applicant in each of the past five years;
(2) what information he has at to the proportion of written planning appeals against decisions by each of the planning authorities in Staffordshire and by the Peak Park planning board which were decided in favour of the applicant in each of the past five years;
(3) what information he has as to the proportion of informal planning appeals against decisions by each of the planning authorities in Staffordshire and by the Peak Park planning board which were decided in favour of the applicant in each of the past five years.
§ Mr. TraceyTables 1 and 2 give details of the numbers of planning appeals under sections 36 and 37 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 against decisions of planning authorities in Staffordshire and of the Peak Park planning board which were decided and allowed in 1984 and 1985 respectively, the earliest years for which information about individual planning authorities is available. "Written planning appeals" and "Informal planning appeals" are assumed to refer to those appeals determined under the written representations and informal hearings procedures respectively.
39W
Planning authority Number of appeals determined following a local public inquiry Number of appeals determined under the written representations procedure Number of appeals determined under the informal hearing procedure Total number of appeals Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Decided Allowed Staffordshire Moorlands District Council 7 2 25 6 — — 32 8 Stoke on Trent City Council 2 1 20 8 4 — 26 9 Tamworth Borough Council 4 2 3 — — — 7 2 Peak Park Planning Board 2 2 17 3 — — 19 5