Urban planning has played an increasing role in response to threats to health and safety, but this can create problematical conflicts with other planning priorities. The author examines how the UK planning system deals in practice with the safety implications of hazardous installations involving the storage and use of toxic, explosive, and flammable substances. The responses that have been made by local planning authorities to hazard – development conflicts in the vicinity of hazardous installations are evaluated. A distinction is made between those responses focused on development restraint through refusing permission for housing, community facilities, and other sensitive land uses, and those focused on the hazard source. It is argued that these last are becoming increasingly significant despite limitations in the statutory powers available. Through focusing on recent developments and drawing on a wide range of experience, the author adds to the existing research literature on planning and hazardous installations in which the evolution of policy and practice in this area has hitherto been rather sporadically examined. The implications of a recent policy focus on brownfield redevelopment, of new European regulations for hazardous sites, and of wider trends in relationships between industry, regulators, and communities at risk are considered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeckU, 1992Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (Polity Press, Cambridge)
2.
BeckU, 1995Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk (Polity Press, Cambridge)
3.
BlowersA, 1993Planning for a Sustainable Environment: A Report by the Town and Country Planning Association (Earthscan, London)
4.
BrehenyMHallP, (Eds), 1996The People: Where Will They Go? The Report of the TCPA Regional Inquiry into Housing Need and Provision in England (Town and Country Planning Association, London)
5.
Bridgewater Mercury1995, “Outrage at safety move”, 7 November, page 1.
6.
BroughC, 1993, “Hazardous Substances Consent — UK legislative control from the local authority viewpoint”, paper presented to the 8th Annual European Summer School on Major Hazards, 13–17 September; copy available from Halton Metropolitan Borough Council, Kingsway, Widnes, Cheshire WA8 7QF
7.
CEC, 1993Report on Land Use Planning Controls for Major Hazard Installations in the European CommunityDirectorate-General Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels
8.
CIA, 1993, “Responsible neighbours”, Chemical Industries Association Ltd, Kings Buildings, Smith Square, London SW1P 3JJ
9.
CIA, 1995, “The public image of the chemical industry”, Chemical Industries Association Ltd, Kings Buildings, Smith Square, London SW1P 3JJ
10.
CollingridgeD, 1980The Social Control of Technology (Open University Press, Buckingham)
11.
CrensonM A, 1971The Un-Politics of Air Pollution: A Study of Non-Decision Making in the Cities (Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD)
12.
CrockerT DShogrenJ F, 1994, “Transferable risks and the technology of environmental conflict”Society and Natural Resources7181–188
13.
CullingworthJ DNadinV, 1994Town and Country Planning in Britain (Routledge, London)
14.
DoE, 1992, “Planning control for hazardous substances”, circular 1992/11, Department of the Environment (The Stationery Office, London)
15.
DoE, 1994, “Planning and pollution control”, Planning Policy Guidance 23, Department of the Environment (The Stationery Office, London)
16.
DoE, 1995, Decision letter on appeal by AV Dawson Ltd against Teesside Development Corporation, Reference APP/X9520/M/94/244951, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, The Pithay, Bristol BS1 2PB
17.
EnnisF, 1996, “Planning obligations and developers”Town Planning Review67145–161
18.
GouldsonAMurphyJ, 1998Regulatory Realities: The Implementation and Impact of Industrial Environmental Regulation (Earthscan, London)
19.
GowH B FOtwayH, 1990Communicating with the Public about Major Accident Hazards (Elsevier, London)
20.
HaddenS G, 1994, “Citizen participation in environmental policy making”, in Learning from Disaster: Risk Management After Bhopal Ed. JasanoffS, (University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA) pp 91–112
21.
HaajerM, 1995The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process (Clarendon Press, Oxford)
22.
HaltonMBC, 1993Halton Local Plan—Deposit VersionHalton Metropolitan Borough Council, Municipal Buildings, Kingsway, Cheshire WAS 7QF
23.
HealeyPMacnamaraOElsonMDoakA, 1988Land Use Planning and the Mediation of Urban Change (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
24.
HMFI, 1983, “The fire and explosions at B&R Hauliers, Salford on Sept.25, 1982”, HM Factory Inspectorate (The Stationery Office, London)
25.
HSE, 1989a, “Qualified risk assessment: Its input into decision making”, Health and Safety Executive (The Stationery Office, London)
26.
HSE, 1989b, “Risk criteria for land-use planning in the vicinity of major industrial hazards”, Health and Safety Executive (The Stationery Office, London)
27.
HSE, 1993The Fire at Allied Colloids LimitedHealth and Safety Executive, 2 Southwark Bridge, London SE1
28.
ImrieJThomasH, (Eds), 1993British Urban Policy and the Urban Development Corporations (Paul Chapman, London)
29.
JasanoffS, 1991, “Acceptable evidence in a pluralistic society”, in Acceptable Evidence: Science and Values in Risk Management Eds MayoD GHollanderR D, (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 29–47
30.
JasanoffS, (Ed.), 1994Learning from Disaster: Risk Management After Bhopal (University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA)
31.
Karrer-RueediE E, 1996, “Trends in toxic chemical releases: A case study on the drug industry in Connecticut and New Jersey”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management39577–591
32.
KunreutherHFitzgeraldKAartsT D, 1993, “Siting noxious facilities: A test of the facility siting credo”Risk Analysis13301–318
LeemingD GSaccamannoF F, 1993, “Effect of transport mode on the risks from handling chlorine at a major industrial facility in the UK”, paper presented at the Emergency Response 93 Conference, 7–10 September, New Brunswick; copy available from Health and Safety Laboratory, Broad Lane, Sheffield S3 7HQ
35.
LewisL E JHaynsM R, 1989, “Limitations on the usefulness of risk assessment”Risk Analysis9483–494
36.
LewisSHenkelsD, 1996, “Good neighbour agreements: A tool for environmental and social justice”Social Justice23(4) 134–151
37.
MacFaydenD, 1970Sir Ebenezer Howard and the Town Planning Movement (Manchester University Press, Manchester)
38.
MacgillS M, 1981, “Liquefied energy gases in the UK: What price public safety?”Environment and Planning A13339–354
39.
McLoughlinJ, 1973Control and Urban Planning (Faber and Faber, London)
40.
MarshallT, 1994, “British planning and the new environmentalism”Planning Practice and Research9(1) 21–30
41.
MillerC E, 1988, “Planning, pollution and hazard”Urban Law and Policy983–108
42.
MillerC E, 1994, “Planning, pollution and risk”Town Planning Review65127–141
43.
MillerC EFrickerC, 1993, “Planning and hazard”Progress in Planning40(3) 169–260
44.
NusseyCCarterD ACassidyK, 1995, “The application of consequence models in risk assessment: A regulators view”, paper presented at International Conference and Workshop on Modelling and Mitigating the Consequences of Accidental Releases of Hazardous Materials, New Orleans, September 1995; copy available from Major Hazards Assessment Unit, Health and Safety Executive, Bootle, Merseyside L20 3RA
45.
OJ1997, “Council Directive 96/82/EC on the control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances”, Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL 10/13.
46.
OrellBCryanJ, 1987, “Getting rid of the hazard”The Chemical Engineernumber 439, 14–15
47.
O'RiordanTWynneB, 1987, “Regulating environmental risks: A comparative perspective”, in Insuring and Managing Hazardous Risks: From Seveso to Bhopal and Beyond Ed. KleindorferP R, (Springer, Berlin) pp 387–410
48.
OwensS, 1994, “Land, limits and sustainability: A conceptual framework and some dilemmas for the planning system”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series19439–456
49.
ParkerD J, 1995, “Floodplain development policy in England and Wales”Applied Geography15341–363
50.
PearceFTombsS, 1996, “Hegemony, risk and governance: Social regulation and the American chemical industry”Economy and Society25428–454
51.
Penning-RowsellE CTunstallS M, 1996, “Risks and resources: Defining and managing the flood plain”, in Floodplain Processes Eds AndersonMWallingDBatesP, (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex) pp 112–132
52.
PettsJ, (Ed.), 1984Major Hazard Installations: Planning Implications and ProblemsDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Loughborough University of Technology, Loughborough
53.
PettsJ, 1988, “Planning and hazardous installation control”Progress in Planning29(1) 1–75
54.
Planning (Hazardous Substances) Act1990Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 10 (The Stationery Office, London).
55.
RydinY, 1995, “Sustainable development and land use planning”Area27369–377
56.
St Helens MBC, 1995, “Unitary Development Plan: Area policies sub-area 6”, deposit draft, St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council, Town Hall, Victoria Square, St Helens, Merseyside WA10 1HP
57.
SmithD, 1990, “Corporate power and the politics of uncertainty: Conflicts surrounding major hazard plants at Canvey Island”Industrial Crisis Quarterly4(1) 1–26
58.
SmithD, 1991, “Beyond the boundary fence: Decision making and chemical hazards”, in Energy, Resources and the Environment Eds BlundenJReddishA, (Hodder and Stoughton, London) pp 267–291
59.
SnowballD JMacgillS M, 1984, “Coping with risk: The case of gas facilities in Scotland”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy2343–360
60.
TalbotJ, 1997, “Cables of concern?”Town and Country Planning66(2) 39–41
61.
TombsS, 1993, “The chemical industry and environmental issues”, in Business and the Environment: Implications of the New Environmentalism Ed. SmithD, (Paul Chapman, London) pp 131–149
62.
WalkerG P, 1986Planning Control of Hazardous Installations and Development in Their Vicinity unpublished PhD thesis, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds
63.
WalkerG P, 1989, “Risks, rights and secrets: Public access to information on industrial major hazards”Policy and Politics17255–271
64.
WalkerG P, 1991, “Land use planning and industrial hazards: A role for the European Community”Land Use Policy8227–240
65.
WalkerG P, 1994a, “Industrial hazards, vulnerability and planning in Third World cities”, in Environment and Housing in Third World Cities Eds MainHWilliamsS W, (Belhaven Press, London) pp 49–65
66.
WalkerG P, 1994bHazardous Substances Consents: A Review of the Operation of Statutory Planning Controls Over Hazardous SubstancesDepartment of Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Brassenden Place, London SW1E 5DU
67.
WalkerG P, 1995, “Land use planning, industrial hazards and the ‘COMAH’ directive”Land Use Policy12(3) 187–191
68.
WalkerG PBaylissD, 1998, “Development plans and hazardous installations”Planning Practice and Research13(1) 23–24
69.
WalkerG PDraycottP, 1996, “Mapping technological hazards: Spatial patterns of major accident hazards in England”, occasional paper new series A, 7, Division of Geography, Staffordshire University, Stoke on Trent, Staffs
70.
WalkerG PMacgillS M, 1985, “Planning control of industrial hazard in a major metropolitan planning authority”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design12463–478
71.
WalkerG PPrattsD PBarlowM, 1998, “Risk, environment and land use: An evaluation of policy and practice in the UK”, in Environment, Planning and Land Use Eds KivellPRobertsPWalkerG P, (Avebury, Aldershot, Hants) pp 100–117
72.
WhatmoreSBoucherS, 1992, “Bargaining with nature: The discourse and practice of planning gain”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series18166–178
73.
WynneB, 1992, “Risk and social learning: Reification to engagement”, in Social Theories of Risk Eds KrimskySGoldingD, (Praeger, New York) pp 275–297
