Departmental Reorganization in a local Authority: the Setting Up of the Norwich City Planning Department
| Published date | 01 March 1974 |
| Date | 01 March 1974 |
| Author | M.B. KINCH |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1974.tb00168.x |
Departmental Reorganization in
a
local Authority:
the Setting Up
of
the Norwich City Planning
Department
hl.
B.K
I
NCH
Mr.Kinch
is
Lecturer
in
Public Administration at
Norzuich
City
College.
INTRODUCTION
On
I
December
1964,
the General Purposes Committee
of
the Norwich
City Council, acting on behalf of the Council, resolved that
a
separate
town planning department, headed by
a
City Planning Officer
as
a
chief
officer
of
the Council, be established to control town planning functions.
Hitherto these functions had been controlled by the City Engineer.
A
City Planning Officer was duly appointed some seven months later and
took up duty on
I
September
1965.
On the same date the town planning
staff of the Engineer’s Department were transferred to the new Planning
Department.
This essay embodies the results of an attempt to discover the processes
by which the decision was made and the difficulties which were experienced
in implementing it. It is hoped that a detailed account
of
an important
change in the internal organization of a county borough council will
shed some light on the manner in which such changes are made. The
account may also serve to call into question
a
view which, following Maud
and Mallaby? has become part
of
the conventional wisdom of local
government
-
the
view
that, in the interests
of
efficiency, local authorities
should seek to reduce the number
of
their departments by grouping
together those with related functions*. The main sources of information
for the enquiry were, first, the Corporation’s written records (e.g. minutes,
reports, correspondence), and, secondly, certain members and officers
of
the Council. The writer is grateful to the many people
who
helped him
with
his
enquiries, especially the Town Clerk of Norwich, Mr.Gordon
Tilsley, without whose co-operation the project would not have been
possible.
*Since this essay
was
written,
the
Bains
Report
has
also
challenged
the
View.
See
Th
New
Local
Authorities:
Managmt
arid
Structure,
1972,
HMSO,
paras
5.60
to
5.77.
95
P
U
6
L
I
C
h
D
M
I
N
I
ST
R
A
T
I0
N
I.
DECISION
The decision to consider the setting up of a separate town planning depart-
ment was given formal effect in May
1964.
At that time town planning
functions were controlled by the City Engineer, who was also responsible
for the design, construction, improvement and maintenance
of
highways,
sewers and sewage disposal, traffic engineering and many other functions.
In May
1964,
the Policy Advisory Committee, on the suggestion
of
its Chairman (Alderman Arthur South, Labour Leader of the Council),
resolved that consideration be given to the question at the Ccmmittee’s
September meeting. The Town Clerk was asked to submit
a
written
report to the members early in September, including information on the
present staffing and responsibilities of the town planning section of the
Engineer’s Department, on the methods
of
discharging town planning
functions, and on the whole range of responsibilities of the Borough
or
City Engineer in each of a number
of
comparable county borough councils.
Accordingly, at the beginning of August the Town Clerk sent
a
detailed
questionnaire to thirty-seven county borough councils in the population
range
IOO,OOO
-
300,000.
(The population of Nonvich at this time was
about
120,000.)
It included a question
as
to whether the authority had
set up
a
separate town planning department; if it had, comments on the
consequential benefits and drawbacks were invited. Where no separate
department had been set up, the authority was asked whether it had ever
considered the question
of
separation; and if it had, why it had decided
against separation.
Thirty-four replies were received. In twenty-five cases, town planning
functions were under the control of the Engineer. In three cases, they were
under the control of the Architect. Five of the remaining six authorities
had
a
separate planning department under an independent chief officer.
Of these five, however, one had recently decided to amalgamate the
department with the Architect’s Department. The sixth authority had
only just decided to
form
a separate department. It was therefore possible
for the Town Clerk to draw upon the experience of only four authorities,
all much larger than Norwich. The main points emerging from this
experience were as follows
:
(I)
In the view
of
all four authorities, the advantages
of
separation
outweighed the disadvantages. More ‘positive’ planning
was
possible.
(2)
Two of the authorities maintained that applicants for planning
vacancies were more likely to be attracted to an authority with a
separate planning department, because
of
the greater scope for
their talents there and the better prospects of advancement. If the
Planning Officer enjoyed a high reputation in his profession, then
applicants were even more likely to be attracted.
(3)
The scope of the work
of
planning departments varied considerably
To continue reading
Request your trial