response sent to: Dear Sir/Madam Response to: The Review of Designated Landscapes in Wales Stage 2

Transcription

1 Royal Town Planning Institute Cymru (RTPI Cymru) PO Box 2465 Cardiff CF23 0DS Tel +44 (0) Website: response sent to: 29 th May 2015 Dear Sir/Madam Response to: The Review of Designated Landscapes in Wales Stage 2 The Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) is the largest professional institute for planners in Europe, representing some 23,000 spatial planners. RTPI Cymru represents the RTPI in Wales, with 1,100 members. The Institute seeks to advance the science and art of spatial planning for the benefit of the public. As well as promoting spatial planning, the RTPI develops and shapes policy affecting the built environment, works to raise professional standards and supports members through continuous education, training and development. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above consultation. The response has been formed drawing on the expertise of the RTPI Cymru Policy and Research Forum which includes a cross section of planning practitioners from the private and public sectors and academia from across Wales. Our response to your questions is set out below. If you require further assistance, have any queries or require clarification of any points made, please contact RTPI Cymru on or Roisin Willmott at walespolicy@rtpi.org.uk Yours sincerely, Dr Roisin Willmott MRTPI Director RTPI Cymru 1

2 Question 1 What are the most effective governance arrangements for designated landscapes that allow them to lead on and meet ambitious outcomes within and for Wales? The Commission on Public Service and Delivery highlighted a lack of national leadership for National Parks, which will inevitably affect the ability of designated landscapes to deliver. On a strategic and national scale it is therefore important that any governance arrangements provide designated landscapes with stronger guidance and direction. The RTPI would therefore be supportive of greater national strategic direction and leadership to all Designated Landscapes in Wales. This should of course not lose sight of the importance of local accountability, and the role of maintaining and enhancing local distinctiveness of the designations at the local level, through their respective authorities. A national level Board with representation from the Welsh Government, NRW and representation from the constituent authorities may be a useful starting point. From a planning perspective, this may allow an improved understanding and better linkages between national level plans and guidance (e.g. National Planning Guidance, National Development Framework, National Natural Resource Plans and their delivery at the local level through National Park Management Plans, Local Development Plans (LDPs) and Area Resource Management Plans). They would also be able to champion good planning practice on the difficult and sometimes unique challenges faced by the designated landscapes. Such a Board would allow the designated landscapes to better respond to and meet national level challenges and requirements whilst providing the necessary leadership, consistency and resilience. It would enable greater cohesiveness on strategic land use issues, whilst allowing the main operation to continue to function at the local level, respecting and meeting the requirements of their specific designations. RTPI Cymru would welcome a further input into any dialogue on the establishment of a Board during this Review process. National Parks Governance Ultimately, areas are designated as National Parks because of the quality and distinctiveness of their landscape and heritage their distinctiveness as places. The current model of involving both national and local interests, managed by an independent National Park Authority (NPA), has served our designated landscapes well in our National Parks. It has struck an appropriate balance between managing these tensions and delivering outcomes of benefit to the whole of Wales. It allows existing links with Unitary Authorities and local communities to be retained and strengthened, whilst also reflecting the national interest in National Parks. However, we believe that there is a case for strengthening the reporting arrangements between the constituent local authorities and their appointed members and between Welsh Government and nominated members. This should again complement and support the monitoring arrangements in place to ensure better leadership and help meet more ambitious outcomes. 2

3 Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) With regard to AONBs, it is recognised that the scale of these will not justify the creation of the same governance model as National Parks. However, given the significance of these landscapes in a national context it is considered that greater emphasis should be placed on ensuring that the right decisions are made in the national interests. The governance arrangements for all AONBs in Wales would benefit from the same model being applied equally to all to ensure consistency and transparency in the way that they are operated and funded. It is believed that governance arrangements for AONBs need to enable the continued delivery of their statutory purpose to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the area and be an open and accountable structure which engages with local communities. RTPI Cymru understands that the current governance arrangements for the newly extended Clwydian Range and Dee Valley AONB, although in its infancy, provide a good mechanism to meet its statutory duty and deliver its management plan within a local, national and international context. The AONB also aspires to deliver for the benefit of local communities, although it is not a statutory purpose of the designation. We would also suggest that a review of boundaries as part of the governance process is considered. There are circumstances where boundaries defined many years ago may no longer make sense as a result of past developments, whilst in other circumstances boundaries could be logically and usefully extended. Inappropriate boundaries undermine the reasoning behind designations, do not foster an ethos of respect for their designation and as a result can impede their successful management. Other matters worthy to note during the governance review for AONBs are: Any changes in governance arrangements proposed must be fit for purpose. Committees or Conservations Boards would become unwieldy if they have too many members and a maximum size of 12 members is suggested. Further resources will need to be made available for designated landscapes to support any additional financial demands linked to any changes in governance resulting from the review. Whilst not a planning consideration we feel that it is worth raising that some governance models available to AONBs, for example Conservation Boards and Limited Liability Companies have the disadvantage of not being VAT exempt, which would effectively result in a 20% decrease in funding. Question 2 In light of the Review s Stage One report and recommendations and the Minister for Natural Resources written statement (dated 4th March) what is your vision and ambition for the direction of Wales s designated landscapes in the medium to long term? The existing statutory purposes have served designated landscapes well over the last few decades. National Parks and AONBs are recognised as a national resource, and this success should be built upon in the future. The RTPI also supports the Stage 1 recommendations of merging a single set of statutory purposes between the two landscape designations in Wales; in planning 3

4 terms there is effectively no difference between them in relation to statutory purposes. There appears to be a strong case for providing designated landscapes with an additional purpose (based upon economic development, through the sustainable use of resources). This would enable the effective integration and management of three pillars of sustainable development (economy, society and environment) for all designated landscapes. However, in order to protect the integrity of these landscapes it is presumed that the Sandford Principle which establishes that where irreconcilable conflicts exist between conservation and public enjoyment, then conservation interests should take priority - must still apply; and that the conservation interest would also take priority in the event of a conflict with an economic development purpose. With a new statutory purpose referred to above, a more direct role could be taken within designated landscapes towards sustainable economic development. This could be through, for example, the preparation of an economic strategy for Designated Landscapes, which could be incorporated into Management Plans and reflected by LDPs. The LDP would be the main driver behind the implementation of any such strategy through land use. As an example, the draft Management Plan for the Clwydian Range and Dee Valley AONB is lacking in the sustainable economic benefits side of the function of AONBs and is heavily directed towards the protection and enhancement function, the introduction of a statutory function in this sense would help redress this balance. Question 3 From a governance perspective, what factors are preventing and/or likely to prevent designated landscapes from achieving the vision and ambition you set out in response to question 2? The planning function within NPAs is a key mechanism for managing, sustaining and enhancing the special qualities of these spaces. RTPI Cymru believes it is important that the basic structure of the existing governance arrangements is retained within National Parks, as it allows NPAs to create planning policies and make planning decisions that directly impact upon these areas. With the appropriate mix of local and national interests, these organisations can strike the appropriate balance between the needs of their community and national interests. This is supported by the LUC in their work commissioned to evidence the Planning Bill. ( Within this they state: the key advantage of planning to National Park boundaries is that NPAs can adopt a consistent approach across the whole of the National Park area in their Local Development Plan regardless of local authority boundaries. This allows clear focus to be given to National Park purposes and allows alignment with the National Park Management Plan, creating a coherent approach and a clear focus across each National Park. (para 3.59). RTPI Cymru believes that the retention of this approach within National Parks is critical to their future. 4

5 RTPI Cymru have been consistent in their response on the evolution of the Planning (Wales) Bill and warmly welcomes the retention of the development planning function for NPAs in the Bill as adopted. We also support the Positive Planning consultation s theme that there should be more and better collaboration between NPAs and other Local Authorities. RTPI Cymru also acknowledges that planning officers are able to perform effectively within either a Local Planning Authority (LPA) or a NPA. However, the context within which they work is important, and this is particularly so in a National Park and it is important therefore to ensure that any collaborative arrangements put in place are backed up by appropriate resources and training for those that become involved in the development management and compliance functions for both officers and Members. We are concerned that where a single National Park is split between two or more LPAs; the opportunity for a different interpretation of policy within a single NPA would be high, leading to inconsistency, in the event of a departure from current arrangements for decision-making on planning applications. RTPI Cymru welcomes Recommendation 6 (pg 8 which provides a clear duty on relevant public bodies to contribute to the three Purposes. This removes a number of barriers including: Public bodies presently not having to give serious consideration as to how they contribute to the purposes; low level of awareness of the duty amongst relevant authorities, with no reporting of implementation e.g. local authority highway departments focus on cost efficiency in highway maintenance, often at the expense of visual amenity; A lack of proper monitoring of the performance of public bodies in relation to their contribution to the existing duty and no clear mechanism through which to achieve compliance. In respect of AONBs, the planning function is often split into individual Local Planning Authorities with an AONB Joint Advisory Committee often responsible for providing an input in to the planning process (LDP and planning applications) for each Authority. On a strategic level it is important that there is a clear understanding of the governance arrangements and their purpose. An understanding of the benefits that sustainable development can bring to such protected landscapes must also be appreciated. RTPI Cymru believes that there is a role for further training and education of those involved in the management of the AONB to ensure a better understanding of the planning system overall and also to set out and manage the expectations of what can and can not be delivered through the planning system via the LDP. Co-ordinated training with NPAs may bring significant benefits in this regard. 5

6 Question 4 From a governance perspective, what factors will allow designated landscapes to achieve the vision and ambition you set out in response to question 2? We would propose the following factors: 1) Retention of all planning functions within NPAs 2) A strengthened duty to have regard to National Park and AONB purposes 3) Establishment of a national overarching group to provide (amongst other things) a strategic direction and enable sharing of best practice 4) An additional statutory purpose encompassing economic development and the sustainable use of resources as referred to in Stage 1 of this Review 5) Greater informal collaboration between NPA and local authorities and other statutory stakeholders, for example, NRW and Cadw. Question 5 Are there other designated landscape/protected area governance models/approaches you wish to bring to the attention of the Review? We have no knowledge of learning from elsewhere, other than that suggested in the LUC report. However this could be an area which could be explored by the national body we advocate in answer to Q1. 6