View report page

126
used for the purpose of the Hospital. There is reason to believe that proposals
are also on foot for utilising the site for the erection of residential flats. Everyone
concerned with child life and public health interests in the neighbourhood generally,
must be anxious that to whatever use the site is ultimately put, the part of it which
has hitherto been open space should be preserved as such and, as far as possible,
devoted to the use of children for playground or open air school purposes.
Town Planning Scheme.
In the year 1926 plans were deposited by the London County Council of a Town Planning
Scheme, dealing in part with land within the area of the Borough and known as the
Administrative County of London Town Planning Scheme No. 5.
The area involved in the first part of the scheme, 133 acres in extent, comprised a
portion of the Foundling Hospital Estate (43 acres) and certain adjoining districts, including
a number of squares, some being wholly or partly in the Borough. The preservation of
these squares (7.13 acres) was considered to be a matter of public importance. The land
included in the scheme was in the hands of several owners and it was hoped that by the
exercise of town planning powers the County Council would be able to assist in promoting
a scheme of re-development of the whole area which would be advantageous to the owners
as well as desirable from a public point of view.
The second part of the scheme dealt with an adjacent area, about 75 acres, between
Euston Road, Great Russell Street, Gower Street, and Woburn Place. The area, it was
stated, was ripe for re-development and contained many amenities which it was desirable
to preserve aa far as possible. The area covered a number of garden squares, including
Russell Square, Tavistock Square, Gordon Square, Torrington Square, and Woburn Square,
and, in addition, included about 11½ acres on both sides of Torrington Square which had
been offered by the Government as a site for the University of London.
Early in the year 1928 a public inquiry into the application for approval of the scheme
was held by direction of the Minister of Health.
Subsequently the Council received a copy of a communication addressed by the Ministry
of Health to the London County Council intimating his findings on the subject of the scheme.
The Minister stated that the matter was an important one for the development of London
and he appreciated the reasons of the London County Council for putting forward the
proposals but on consideration of the evidence and arguments placed before the Inspector
who held the enquiry, the Minister found it necessary to distinguish between (a) the site of
Ihe Foundling Hospital and the two adjoining squares (Mecklenburgh and Brunswick), (b)
the site acquired by the London University north of the British Museum, together with
Torrington Square, and (c) the remainder of the land included in the proposed scheme. With
regard to the last-mentioned land (c), the Minister was not satisfied that this area, the pre at
bulk of which was still closely covered with buildings, could properly be regarded as " land
likely to be used for building purposes " within the meaning of Section 1 (1) of the Town
Planning Act, 1925, and he, therefore, formed the conclusion that the proposals put forward
hy the County Council as regards this land were beyond their powers under Section 1 (1)
of the Act. except to the limited extent that land already built upon might be included in a
scheme under the proviso to that sub-section.
As regards (b) the Minister stated that the London County Council presumably would
not consider there would be an advantage in preparing a scheme for the land included in
the area, having regard to the prospective use of the land.
As regards (a) (Founding Site) it seemed inadvisable to town plan a relatively small
area in the midst of already developed areas which could not under present powers be made
subject to appropriate restrictions, unless in any particular case there were special conditions
which justified an exception. The Minister appreciated that there might be such conditions
ir. this case and intimated that hfl would be prepared, if the County Council so desired, to
consider proposals for this area and, vnder the proviso to Section 1 (1) of the Act of 1925,
for a. fringe of developed land. He suggested, however, that before action was taken on those
lines it would be an advantage if the County Council communicated with the owners to
s~> whether arrangements as satisfactory as could be expected under the present conditions
could not be made without a formal scheme.