It relies on a "plan-led system" whereby development plans are produced, involving various stages of public consultation prior to being adopted.
Development involving mining, minerals or waste disposal matters is dealt with by county councils in non-metropolitan areas.
However, a separate system to grant or withhold planning permission for the small amount of development which would be undertaken by the private sector was also required.
More recent changes to PD rules require some element of contact with the LPA before implementation - for example prior notification.
Some small scale changes between use classes are nevertheless "permitted development" and hence do not require planning permission, subject to any site specific restrictions.
The owner of a listed building can also be compelled to keep it in a good state of repair to safeguard its architectural or historic significance.
The planning policies expressed in the LDF deal with a wide range of local issues including promoting more energy efficient transport facilities, highway proposals and highway safety, ensuring an adequate supply of land for housing and other uses, safeguarding areas of countryside, and safeguarding important landscapes or sites of historic, ecological or scientific importance.
The interests of sustainability are built into LDFs, not only in terms of energy efficiency, but also in promoting economic growth, regeneration, and the fostering of strong and inclusive communities.
This issue has never been legislated upon by Parliament and consists entirely of judge-made law arising out of numerous cases decided by British courts.
Private covenants over land or anything regulated by other legislation are also incapable of being a material consideration in deciding a planning application.
However, while they cannot choose to simply ignore a relevant issue, provided they behave reasonably they are entitled to decide how much weight should be given to competing priorities.
If planning permission is to be refused, or if enforcement action is to be taken against unauthorised development, then the LPA must give reasons in writing which show "demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance".
An Inspector (in England and Wales), Reporter (in Scotland), or Commissioner (in Northern Ireland) investigates the question and decides to uphold or overturn the decision of the LPA.
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.
Even a well managed LPA, making decisions in light of published planning policies and after extensive public consultation, will still attract accusations of unfairness.
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.
Although members are democratically elected, they should not decide applications on the basis of strength of public opinion, but according to planning law.
Councillors who are members of a Council's Planning Committee are subject to different restrictions regarding conflicts of interest, depending on the country of the United Kingdom, and to a Code of Conduct which may be statutory or locally decided.
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.
[11] There is much case law 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 decision with their mind closed to the arguments of fellow members and the advice of the Officers.
not only ask Councillors to listen to their views, but also try to persuade them to commit for or against a Planning Application in advance, without understanding that if they do so there will be a risk of a legal challenge to the decision if those taking it have predetermined their position.
This culture change has only been partly successful as applicants often see it as one more task to get through and tend to have D&As drawn up after completion of design work to 'tick the box'.
The policy intention of the UK Government and most LPAs is that new developments should contribute positively to their surroundings, rather than merely avoid doing unacceptable harm.
LPAs vary in their attitude to pre-application discussion but the advantage is to front load the process, and reduce the formal planning application closer to a “rubber stamp”.
In the past developers often submitted a planning application as the start of what was expected to be a lengthy process of negotiation with the LPA.
Attitudes have now changed and few LPAs will agree to accept significantly amended proposals after submission of the application since this would require them to restart public consultations and so delay their decision.
Along with the requirement to prepare well written and complete documentation with the original submission this puts the onus increasingly on the applicant to get their proposal right first time.
A much larger number of householder proposals are classed as permitted development and do not require a planning application to be made.
Among other things this would free resources for more important work in implementing local planning policies which would be of wider public benefit.