Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution

1.     Environmental Sustainability
a.     Broadly speaking this objective has focussed attention on the need for sustainability - what it means and what is needed to achieve it. If a sustainable approach is adopted towards development, all policies are driven by this basic concept and unsustainable policies/proposals require specific justification. Unfavourable consequences perhaps embrace issues such as perceived lack of clarity in broadly worded policies - what does it actually mean on the ground ? How are broadly worded policies interpreted at the local level ? Many decisions require a degree of subjective assessment - one view against another which can lead to protracted discussions on major and often minor points.

b.     The balance is difficult to achieve and indeed to identify and promote. What is of value to one may be of lesser value to another and vice versa. It is difficult to put a value on environmental wealth compared to other benefits which stem from proposed developments. Policies which are worded broadly and indeed are promoted by bodies such as English Nature stress the need to weigh up the value of a development proposal against any international, national or local value attached to a development site. Further advice on how this might be approached would be welcome if only to achieve a common methodology.

c.

d.     The plan led system has the potential to prioritise sustainability at the local level. However it also means that sustainable proposals as well as environmental policies aimed at achieving sustainable development are more likely to be challenged in their formative stages. Developers perceive these policies as frustrations to the development process and are keen to interrogate them to establish how they will be applied. Standard policies for matters such as designated sites of nature conservation would help though of course these would require interpretation in the case of each individual development proposal. PPG9 could give greater weight to the work and recommendations of English Nature in this respect.

e.     The move to 'plan, monitor, manage' implies a common sense approach to the provision of development - a system more able to adapt to what has actually been achieved on the ground rather than what might be achieved on paper. Hopefully the loss of 'predict and provide' will place less emphasis on the 'numbers game' and reduce the pressure on less sustainable sites brought into the frame to make up the numbers.

f.     This is one of the major weaknesses of the EIA system - it fails to take account of the cumulative impact of small developments on the environmental wealth of an area. Lack of effective monitoring also means that this impact is difficult to quantify.

g.     New PPG12 places greater emphasis on monitoring local plan policies. This is a move to be welcomed as only with the benefit of hindsight can the success of policies be realised. However, effective review of policies through monitoring of their performance can only be achieved if staff time and other resources are committed to this process. S54a has undoubtedly increased interest in policy planning, increasing workloads especially those associated with the plan making process. Greater emphasis on monitoring adds to this burden further stretching available resources.

h.     Awareness of the potential long term risks, eg increased flooding, should be an issue at both national and local levels. As development plans cover relatively short periods, the context of a 'long term vision' is essential to reflect this awareness and the extent of damage should be limited by producing policies consistent with national/global sustainability targets.

2.     Boundaries
a.     Cross boundary issues require greater liaison between the various authorities and statutory/non-statutory bodies involved in policy formulation. It requires consensus both professional and political. Consistency is therefore more difficult to achieve and where this is lacking, the systems become complex to use. Without common goals results become difficult to achieve and the constituent parts lack integrity. Achieving consistency on cross border issues is difficult because at the most basic level it affects the democratic process. This is even more marked when the border is a county or regional border as well as a local border. Greater guidance from central government could be offered and at the extreme some kind of inquiry procedure could be put in place but this would further complicate the adoption of policy at a time when moves are being made to simplify the system.

b.     This creates unnecessary complications and inconsistencies in advice. Users of the system are unsure as to the status of the various documents available and where policies appear to conflict, which one takes precedence. A clear hierarchy could be established with statutory documents taking the lead role, referring to non-statutory guidance in its text to guide users.

c.    Planning in its broadest sense encompasses all the areas mentioned and ideally the development plan should dove-tail with policies produced in support of these matters. The development plan system allows consultation with statutory and non statutory bodies dealing with these issues and therefore can accommodate and support policy targets in this way. A development plan which addressed transport, energy, water provision, flood protection, climate change and nature conservation in their entirity would be a weighty document indeed.

d.     GIS enables centralisation of records for ease of use. The essential problem is the integrity of the information held. Who is responsible for the collection, maintenance and use of data ? Who is ultimately accountable ? The example of the Biological Records Centre is perhaps a good one. On the surface the amalgamation of facts regarding sites of known value seems sound. However, concerns regarding the accuracy of the data, its source and how up to date it is means that development control staff would need to verify the output with the relevant statutory consultee. The BRC therefore adds a further hurdle to the already complex and time consuming administration surrounding the development control function. At a less formal level GIS is undoubtedly invaluable in its ability to record and extract often complex data regarding given sites. It also allows the mapping of eg. constraints across administrative boundaries in order that the wider picture can be appreciated. Maintenance of the system remains the key - with time and financial resources available to support the use of GIS, its value in both the long and short term will be greater. Consideration could also be given to the use of GIS on a county or regional basis ensuring that the consistency issue is addressed.

e.     Regarding agriculture, greater incentives to achieve nature conservation aims, a clearer, less bureaucratic system of farm conservation/diversification schemes and a complete review of the Common Agricultural Policy would go further to achieve environmental goals than imposing strict controls.

3.     Integration or co-ordination
a.     It appears to those both inside and outside the profession that a plethora of documentation is being produced and many are unsure of the relative status.

b.     From the planning angle, PPG9 could make this clearer - local plans/structure plans/UDPs could also make reference to documents produced by other agencies and how they support the statutory development plan.

c.

d.     There is undoubtedly a conflict between a speedier planning process and effective environmental planning on all levels. Environmental assessments take time to prepare - often because recording a full year cycle on a given site is difficult to undertake unless existing comprehensive records are already available. Monitoring the effects of development on environmental quality is also time consuming. The monitoring process itself takes time to set up and time to manage. The availability of centralised data could significantly speed up this process if the integrity of the data could be assured.

e.     Parallel decision making on pollution issues succeeds where discreet issues are being considered. A comprehensive planning system that tried to deal with all angles of pollution would stray from land use planning issues and become weighty. The current system could be improved through better communication. Joint publications could advise the public of their responsibilities as well as the procedures they need to go through.

f.     Problems still exist in this area. The subject of transport and land use planning is often considered too narrowly within local/county boundaries. Pricing structures aimed at managing parking in one district can drive spending to adjacent areas where pricing is more favourable. This illustrates the need for stronger national guidance on this subject. Options are often politically unpopular.

g.     Informal guidance can help to inform users but not replace regulation. Informal guidance itself should be concise - often there is too much written on a subject and users 'don't know where to start'.

h.     A betterment tax would certainly give more certainty to the process but is likely to meet resistance from many quarters. How would the level of tax be determined? A pre-determined formula perhaps but contrary to Circular 1/97. Linking a betterment tax to environmental impact would be particularly difficult because each case is likely to depend on subjective views of quality. Should the quality be judged on a local or national level ? What is exceptional in one location may be common-place in another.

4.     Subsidiarity and democracy
a.     It is difficult to judge whether altering the balance (how?) would affect the outcome. If greater weight was afforded to public opinion this could be at the expense of national policy - local and national priorities often differ. If power was taken from the elected leadership then this affects basic democracy. There perhaps needs to be a greater transparency in the decision making process. At the local level consistency is easier to achieve than at the national level - one elected body making decisions for a relatively small geographical area. Where subjectivity comes into the frame it is easier to be consistent. This is more difficult nationally - the planning inspectorate deals with a much wider area and has many professionals of different disciplines. Weighing up local issues with a wider national policy perspective can lead to a variety of outcomes and perceived lack of consistency.

b.     This is difficult. Again transparency is key - the wider national goal must be shown to be of greater benefit if local interests are to be forfeited. National guidance in this respect must be clear.

c.     The principle of the hierarchy is sound at the national level but locally most public weight is afforded to environments that enjoy only local recognition or no recognition at all. Open fields and views often form the very basis of 'quality of life' yet in the majority of cases receive no special protection and therefore are not viewed as important in the national context. A common view from local residents is that local value is not important. National guidance does not help to dispel this view. Again, the cumulative effects of small developments at a local level is an issue here - there should be greater consideration at a national level as to how these can be measured and how the total may be influencing the achievement of national environmental protection targets.

d.     The links between national and local planning regimes need to be clear and simple, accountability needs to be clear and the system needs to be seen to be working and achieving aims and targets.

e.    

f.     The general feeling is that the present form of planning inquiry is only suitable for larger issues - otherwise they are a daunting procedure, very legalistic, lengthy and benefit those who can afford to pay for expert representation. Hearings are more informal and therefore offer the opportunity for non-professionals to be involved and for the issues to be fully aired in an informal manner. The hearing also has the advantage that it can be run in a manner which suits a particular case. The third party right of appeal is a complex issue. Whilst it would on the face of it make the system fairer - it would serve to lengthen an already lengthy process and would become extremely complex.

g.     Perhaps this type of procedure could be used selectively in the case of major proposals but would lengthen and further legalise the process.

5.     Assessment approaches
a.     Experience has shown that the nature and detail of environmental assessment required is dependent upon each individual circumstance. Whilst the core set of subjects may be common to most applications, each site will have a particular set of characteristics that make one or more issues more critical than others. For example some sites suffer contamination whilst others suffer traffic pollution and its environmental effects. The link between methodologies applied to individual cases and the wider environmental goal is dependent upon effective links within the authority dealing with the application. It is easy to see one application in isolation.

b.     The difficulty here is that environmental appraisal can be a lengthy process depending of course on the scope and extent of the appraisals being undertaken. As a result EA can significantly extend the time taken to make decisions on planning applications. However, environmental appraisal should be an ongoing part of the development plan process, ensuring that once adopted, structure, local and unitary plans are firmly based on sustainable principles. S54a has made this essential. Appraisal of proposals in the development plan as part of the plan preparation process can reduce the need for appraisal to be undertaken at the time a planning application is submitted (if the data is still up to date). The particular circumstances surrounding a proposal for development will to some extent dictate who should be responsible for undertaking EA. As part of the development plan process the plan making authority is most likely to initiate assessment unless a developer is actively promoting the site in which case their input is likely to be expected. Where development is speculative, this local authority is likely to place the burden of undertaking the surveys on the developer and will scrutinise the results when they are submitted.

c.     This authority has recently initiated a health impact assessment for one proposed development area in the local plan. Disagreements are ongoing with the developers and their agents regarding the re-routing of traffic away from the potential centre of an extended community. The aim of the HIA was to explore from a different angle the benefits and disbenefits of the various options for development in order to optimise the development principles for the site. The study's findings are most interesting not only as they relate to this particular site but also in the basic health related principles that are drawn out. HIAs are obviously helpful tools in the right places but I would not consider that it is necessary to initiate a full HIA for every development proposal. These should be reserved for instances where there are obvious health impacts.

d.    

e.     This is a key factor in achieving successful environmental assessment. Resource issues prevent much of this work from being undertaken in-house which adds to the complexities of the matter. The range of potential issues is broad and it would be unrealistic to expect planners to become specialists in every field. New and innovative approaches are limited by lack of expertise both inside and outside the authority.

Back to Index of evidence to the Environmental Planning Study