...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Planning & Environment Law >R. (on the application of Licensed Taxi Drivers Assoc) v Transport for London
【24h】

R. (on the application of Licensed Taxi Drivers Assoc) v Transport for London

机译:R.(根据特许出租车司机协会的申请)v伦敦交通

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The claimant, a representative body for licensed taxi drivers in London, applied for judicial review of a decision of the defendant highway authority ("TfL") to construct a "cycle superhighway" without planning permission. The cycle superhighway was a segregated cycle lane that was to run continuously for 9.5km on local authority roads and the TfL road network. Its construction involved, amongst other things, reducing the number of vehicular traffic lanes along its route; redesigning junctions; changing parking and loading arrangements; and improving lighting and pedestrian facilities. It was a key element of the Mayor of London's 2012 transport strategy. Public consultation began in September 2014, and the claimant made representations. In January 2015, TfL published its response to the consultation together with an environmental evaluation report. Concluding that the construction of the superhighway would not have any significant adverse impact on the environment, it approved the proposal. Work began in April 2015. TfL took the view that planning permission was not required because the works were not "development" within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.55(l). Its case was that, as road improvement works that would not have significant adverse environmental impact, the works were exempted by s.55(2)(b). The claimant argued that the works would have a significant adverse impact. It initially sought a declaration to the effect that TfL was in breach of planning control by carrying out the works without planning permission. During the hearing it amended its application so as to seek instead a declaration that TfL had acted unlawfully by failing to either request a screening opinion or submit an environmental statement to the relevant local planning authorities. The issues were: (1) whether the works were "development" within the meaning of s.55(1); and (2) if they were, whether declaratory relief should be granted.
机译:索赔人是伦敦持牌出租车司机的代表机构,未经被规划许可,就被告公路当局(“ TfL”)关于修建“自行车高速公路”的决定提出司法审查。自行车道是一条隔离的自行车道,在地方当局道路和TfL道路网上连续行驶9.5公里。它的建设除其他外,包括减少其路线上的车辆行车道的数量;重新设计路口;更改停车位和装载安排;改善照明和行人设施。这是伦敦市长2012年交通战略的关键要素。公众咨询于2014年9月开始,索赔人进行了陈述。 TfL于2015年1月发布了对磋商的回应以及环境评估报告。它认为高速公路的建设不会对环境造成任何重大不利影响,因此批准了该提案。工程于2015年4月开始。TfL认为不需要规划许可,因为该工程不是1990年《城镇规划法》第55(l)条所指的“开发中”。它的案例是,由于道路改建工程不会对环境造成重大不利影响,因此该工程被第55(2)(b)条豁免。索赔人辩称,这些工程将产生重大不利影响。最初,它要求TfL未经规划许可而进行工程,从而声明其违反了规划控制。在听证会上,法院修改了其申请书,以寻求宣告TfL因未请求审查意见或未向相关地方规划当局提交环境声明而非法行事。问题是:(1)这些作品是否属于第55(1)条所指的“发展中”; (2)如果是,是否应给予声明性救济。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号