Role of AONB Designation in the Planning Process

Delivery of Planning Services in Statutory Designated Landscapes in Wales

Lyndis ColePrincipalLUC

Phase 1: Comparative assessment of planning delivery in statutory designated landscapes in England, Wales and Scotland

Work undertaken in Phase 1

• Describing the different planning delivery models for statutory protected landscapes in the UK

• Comparing and contrasting how planning services are delivered

Hierarchy of Statutory Designated Landscapes

1. National Park Authorities with full planning powers

(applies to all in England, Wales and Scotland apart from the South Downs and the Cairngorms)

Hierarchy of Statutory Designated Landscapes

2. National Park Authorities with shared planning powers

(Cairngorms National Park, Scotland – five constituent LPAs deal with most planning applications but CNPA decides whether to call some in; and South Downs National Park – 15 constituent LPAs deal with most planning applications;

NPA deals with applications for more significant development within the National Park)

• Cairngorms: 2 additional aims (a) to promote sustainable use of natural resources; (b) to promote sustainable economic and social development of the area’s communities

• The Cairngorms and South Downs NPAs responsible for preparing the Local Development Plan for the NP area

• Cairngorms (5) and South Downs (15): Constituent authorities determine smaller applications and those in the larger settlements. NPAs determine more significant applications that may conflict with the national park purposes. 2006 13.6% of planning applications determined by NP falling to 9.2% of applications in 2010.

• SDs 4,000 applications – 97% determined by the constituent authorities.

• TEXT

• TEXT

Hierarchy of Statutory Designated Landscapes

3. AONBs with Conservation Boards

(Cotswolds and the Chilterns: no planning powers but have a Planning Committee and Planning Officer who comment on planning applications in the AONB)

• AONB Conservation Boards can be created under the CRoW Act 2000.

• All Conservation Boards made up of Secretary of State appointees; reps. of the constituent local authorities and reps. of the parish councils (some 35 members). All members take part in key decisions affecting the AONB.

• All statutory planning functions remain with the constituent local authorities.

Hierarchy of Statutory Designated Landscapes

4. AONBs with Joint Advisory Committees / Partnerships

(remaining English and all Welsh AONBs: able to comment on planning applications; a few employ their own Planning Officer)

• Managed by a partnership of their constituent local authorities and other public and voluntary bodies with an interest in the land that they cover.

• Gower (1 - 2), Anglesey (1), Llyn (1), Clwydian Range (2 - 3), and Wye Valley (3)

Hierarchy of Statutory Designated Landscapes

5. NSAs with Management Strategies adopted as SPGs

(Dumfries and Galloway: 3 NSAs have Strategies and the Council employs an NSA officer to oversee their implementation)

• SNH has identified the special qualities of every NSA (40)

• Dumfries and Galloway Council pioneering use of Management Strategies adopted as SPG + dedicated NSA officer (primary emphasis on project work).

• SNH has to be consulted on certain categories of development (i) schemes of 5 + houses; (ii) structures over 12m high; (iii) non residential development over 0.5 ha.

• TEXT

• TEXT

SUMMARY FINDINGS from Phase 2

Planning frameworkNational Parks AONBs

2 of 3 NPAs have an adopted LDP working to the NP boundaries.

None of the constituent authorities have an LDP and considerable variation in progress. All working to authority boundaries. Planning boundary of AONB often different to its actual boundary

ALL policies framed by national park purposes and duty and reflect the NP special qualities.

Only 2 of 6 Development Plans introduce the AONB at outset in a strategic objective or policy.Only one or two specific policies relate to the AONB – an area which may cover third/half of authority area. Often given no greater prominence than other designations e.g. Conservation Areas.

All three NPAs have common Sustainable Design Guidance and two have a raft of SPG including an LCA working to the Park boundaries.

Currently no LCA or SPG on landscape or design guidance (Gower an exception). AONB Management Plans only sometimes adopted as SPG.

Strong (joint) programme of member training

Considerable variety in member training programmes: little specifically relating to the AONB

Planning process (national approval rate 85.7%)

National Parks AONBs

Application approval rate: 87% SNPA; 85% PCNPA; 73% BBNPA

Application approval rate: 84.5% compared to av. of 85.3% in remainder of authority area

Applications delegated: 85% Applications delegated: 90%

% approved within 8 weeks: 64% % approved within 8 weeks: 63% (44% – 77%) across LPA area

Number of appeals subsequently approved: 25% - 35%

Number of appeals subsequently approved: Up to 65%

NPAs have rigorous processes for reviewing individual applications and may call on a wide range of specialists, including landscape specialists where needed.

Variable processes for reviewing individual applications in the AONBs in terms of AONB officer consultation and use of specialists. Landscape advice limited.

Set within context of National Park policies AONB policy(s) always referred to.

Variable relationship with the socio-economic functions of the constituent authorities.

Direct relationship with the socio-economic functions of the constituent authorities – working to a common agenda.

Stakeholder views• All recognised the need for high levels of protection in NPs and

AONBsBut:• NPAs identified by environmental groups as not stringent

enough in controlling development, especially large-scale tourism and housing developments .

• Or too stringent by those representing rural industries, affordable housing and economic development. Characterised as ‘closed for business’, seeking to fossilise the landscape.

• Designation seen as a double-edged sword for the local economy.• National Parks seen as strongly recognisable ‘islands’ with a very

recognisable public image (covering 20% of Wales).

Conversely:• AONBs not picked out as being strongly constraining on

development and no real influence on the delivery of affordable housing.

• AONBs seen as part of the wider landscape and communities of the constituent local authority areas (5% of Wales). They are the most rural parts of these authorities.

Broad conclusions

AONBs: constituent authorities need to develop a robust and consistent planning framework that reflects the national status of AONBs (equivalent to National Parks):

a) Ensuring that the local development plan fully reflects the importance of the AONB landscape in its overall strategy

b) Sharing of best practice across LPAs with AONBs.c) Promoting the shared training of members across LPAs

with AONBs (as in the case of the NPAs).d) Ensuring that the AONB officer / Unit and Partnership has

a distinct identity separate from the LPA. e) Adoption of the AONB statutory Management Plan or

planning guidelines as SPG/SPD.f) Monitoring the effect of planning decisions on the

landscape of AONBs.g) Improved enforcement.

A ‘can-do’ attitudeAll relevant authorities and particularly NPAs need to: • Foster the National Parks (and AONBs) as living landscapes

that evolve, whilst maintaining their special qualities and unique character.

• Pro-actively seek sustainable socio-economic opportunities in harmony with the designation, identifying opportunities of mutual benefit.

• In so-doing, for planning to work in close liaison with the socio-economic responsibilities of the constituent authorities, developing strong co-operation based on a common agenda and mutual respect.

• For planning to have a ‘can-do’ outward facing mentality.• For an over-arching emphasis on sustainable design in

keeping with surrounding landscape character, that emphasises the use of natural materials but is not solely embedded in the past.

Specific recommendations for AONBs• Guidance (NAAONBs?) should stress the equal importance

of NPs and AONBs in planning terms• Statutory AONB Management Plans should include a

specific section on planning (guidelines) within the AONB• These to be adopted as SPG/SPD by all constituent

authorities• The AONB statutory designated landscape should be

identified prominently in the introductory sections of the local development plans of the constituent authorities of AONBs

• The development plans of constituent authorities to adopt a similar policy approach, requiring liaison between the different constituent authorities

• NAAONBs to promote examples of socio-economic development that fit with the AONB statutory purpose

• Planning functions to link with economic development and affordable housing functions of lpas.

• Greater consistency in pre application advice.

Actions for AONB Partnerships1. Promote consistent planning to the AONB boundary2. Have planning guidelines for the whole AONB area,

adopted by all constituent authorities3. Forge links between the partnership and the Committees

of the constituent authorities4. Invite economic development officers, rural housing

enablers and development managers from their constituent authorities to attend workshops to discuss the interplay of commercial and community needs with the purpose of statutory designation.

5. Remember these are LANDSCAPE DESIGNATIONS.

AONBs need collectively to reassert their importance. Underline that the planning tests are the same in National Parks and AONBsEnsure that through the Taylor Review vital guidance is not lost.