~ Vernon Hughes
We would like to hear about any planning proposal that you consider could affect the Quantocks or its setting so that we can assess whether to make a submission to planners. Alex Meletiou at the National Landscape team also looks at planning applications but due to the inconsistencies of planning offices some slip by unnoticed. Of course, in most cases we will be supporting Alex’s comments, but we still feel that FotQ should have its own view on matters that affect the appearance or environment of The Quantock Hills.
If you know of any planning application, permitted development notification, change to a tree preservation order, or any similar application or enforcement matter that will be decided by the local authority, please let us know as soon as possible by writing to:
Vernon Hughes at [email protected]
Please note, the issue should affect our hills or their setting. It would also be helpful to include a reference number and the date by which comments need to be submitted.
So why now?
Unsympathetic developments make it easy to be gloomy about the fate of our countryside, but it’s not all bad news. A change to the Countryside and Right of Way Act (CRoW act) has brought greater protection for areas such as National Landscapes and National Parks. Since last December developments in and near the National Landscape must meet stricter criteria and we have more scope to object if they fail to enhance the environment and beauty of the hills.
A recent helpful briefing paper produced by the National Landscapes Association (NLA), details the change in the law *. The amended act requires ‘relevant authorities’ (in our case, Somerset Council), in exercising or performing any function that affect AONBs in England, to “seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.” (they continue to use ‘AONB’ because the legislation hasn’t caught up with the name changes! I’ll use NL)
The amendments to CRoW also make it clear that this is a statutory duty. It is something all ‘relevant authorities’ must do; it is not discretionary. Furthermore, we are not just considering development inside the NL. The duty applies to decision-making “in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an AONB but also, for e.g., affecting its setting.” Unfortunately, what counts as the “setting” of The Quantock Hills can be a matter of opinion.
This is a major change in planning policy. Previously Somerset Council only had to have a “regard” for the protected status, woolly enough to be useless. Now there is a lot more involved. As the NLA puts it; “…where harm is identified, ‘enhancements’ themselves… are unlikely to be sufficient to align with the duty, which has the dual consideration of conserving and enhancing natural beauty.”
Despite the duty imposed on the Council, almost a year after the change, there is still uncertainty about how it will be implemented. As one example, a huge agricultural building could be authorised within 28 days and with little scrutiny. How such a development can “conserve and enhance” natural beauty remains to be tested.
To carry out its duty the Somerset Council needs to know what should be conserved and whether any proposed enhancements “…genuinely align with, and help deliver, the objectives, principles and/or policies and resulting actions of the specific AONB Management Plan”. The current Quantock Hills Management Plan is available online** with an update expected in 2025.
An under-resourced Council may not welcome more duties placed on planning officers, but the CRoW act changes must have a real effect on decision-making. We’ll be looking out for examples and report back in a future newsletter.
~ ~ ~
*You can find the NLA’s briefing paper at https://national-landscapes.org.uk/guidance-for-local-planning-authorities-on-crow-s-85-duty
**Quantocks Management Plan and associated documents at https://www.quantockhills.com/management-plan-documents
Join us today to help support our work