From: Gary Houston Sent: 06 May :36 To: Planning, Policy Cc: jim Haughey Subject: Consultation Response to PPS

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "From: Gary Houston Sent: 06 May :36 To: Planning, Policy Cc: jim Haughey Subject: Consultation Response to PPS"

Randall French
7 years ago
Views:

1 From: Gary Houston Sent: 06 May :36 To: Planning, Policy Cc: jim Haughey Subject: Consultation Response to PPS Attachments: Comment on PPS doc; Comment on PPS doc Dear Sir/Madam, We support the views of the Ulster Angling Federatiom and do not support this proposed change to planning regulations. We believe in the current format this will be damaging to the Northern Ireland environment, Regards, Gary Houston Honorary Secretary Iveagh Angling Club 43 The Granary Waringstown Craigavon BT66 7TG From: To Subject: IMPORTANT AND URGENT - Planning Consultation Date: Sun, 1 May :55: file:///c /Documents%20and%20Settings/ /Desktop/PPS%2024/117 htm[06/06/ :56:13]

2 To; Mr Stephen Hamilton Draft PPS23 Enabling Development Public Consultation Planning Policy Division Department of the Environment Millennium House Great Victoria Street Belfast BT2 7BA Dear Sir, We enclose the responses of our angling club to the Draft Planning Policy Statements; PPS 24 Economic Considerations PPS 23 Enabling Development We would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this . Yours faithfully, Xxxxxx file:///c /Documents%20and%20Settings/ /Desktop/PPS%2024/117 htm[06/06/ :56:13]

3 Submission on Draft Planning Policy Statement 24: Economic Considerations 29/04/20011 Abbreviations used in the text: NGO s Non Government Organisations 1 Backgrou nd Local Angling Associations have worked extr emely hard for many years to conserve, protect, and enhance not only the fishery on rive rs but the entire river environment, for the benefit of local people and in creasingly, visitors. Count less (voluntary) man-hours and hundreds of thousands of pounds have been spent to improve rivers and associated fisheries: these Ass ociations continue to provide a self-fi nancing a nd volunt ary community-based effort to look after the rivers. The Pricewaterhouse Coopers Report of July 2007 for DCAL on the social and econom ic value of angling in N I, states that all forms of angling in NI support some 780 full time equivalent jobs, and are worth so me 40m p.a. to the NI ec onomy, mostly from game angling. If this jobs/economic benefit is to maintained and enhanced, the conservation of good water and catchment habitat is vital. This DCAL study highlighted th e impressive record of ang ling in promoting a health y, outdoor activity with an almost unmatched reco rd in eliminating sectarian influences. Angling As sociations are now responsib le fo r selling large nu mbers of day tickets to visiting anglers and are generat ing considerable int erest in NI among anglers from outside the area. It is theref ore important that a proposal which may jeopardise this community activity should be subject to reasonable assessment. This Angling Association is very concerned about the effects of these proposals on rivers and lakes as a number of planni ng applications have proved to be detrimental to the environment generally and to waterways and fisheries in particular. It is important that the natural integrity of rivers is protect ed to allow continuation of the natural ec ology of the stream, and to allow existing fish popula tions to prosper. The following comments are made in that light. 2 Background to the policy Page 1 of 3

4 The aim of PPS24 is to ensure that economic considerations should be taken strongly into account when planning applications are being processed. The draft states that where the economic implications of a proposal are significa nt, substantial weight shall be afforded to them in the det ermination of that planning application. In such case s, substantial weight can mean determinative weight. 3 Comments Everyone accepts that the Nort hern Ireland economy is experiencing great challenges at the moment, and that ways sho uld be so ught to stimulate econ omic growth. PPS24 is promoted as a way to encour age economic growth by giving ec onomic consideration s determinative weight in planning decisions. PPS24 is fundamentally flawed becaus e it undermines the purpose of plannin g, contradicts the government s commitment to sustainable development and could lead to unacceptable and irreversible environmental damage. Our planning system is based on full assessment of all material considerations in applications, and economic factors are already covered by this system. Scope exist s within the existing planning sys tem to allow exceptions to plan ning policy and many examples exist wher e economic consider ations hav e been given priority over other material considerations to facilitate planning permissions that would otherwise have been rejected. Assigning determinative weight to economic considerations and the setting aside of all other mate rial considerations is inappropria te, counter to the plan led system, sho rt sighted, and undemocratic in t hat it can over-rule locall y agreed Area Plans. It may also be illegal. We do not see a need for this po licy, but if PPS24 is to bec ome acceptable it must have major revi sions and clarification to prev ent inappr opriate development and prop er protection of the environment. PPS24 undermines the entire st ructure of plann ing at pr esent, with the Regiona l Development Strategy and Loc al Plans all being subjec t to full public scrutiny and analysis. By setting one PPS above others it undermines this entire structure. No other material considerations hav e been singled out for such treatment. The pursuit of economic growth is not the only objective of the government. Prioritising the economic considerations in planning applic ations to the point of assignin g them determinative weight would be neglecting other aspects that government is obliged to protect. The introduction to PPS24 states that It i s vital that proposals that may bring investment are processed as quickly as possible. Rapid decis ion-making should not be the top priority of pl anners; rather their role s hould be to make the best Page 2 of 3

5 decision in the interests of Northern Ir eland as a whole and th e proper protection of the environment. There is no reference to the time scale of economic implications to be considered, and it would be dangerous to allow a system where s hort-term economic gain is put ahead of all ot her material consider ations. Following th e principles of sustainable development, in addition to economic benefits, developers and planners should take full account of the present and future costs incurred through the impacts of the development. There is every likelihood that PPS 24 will be used as a tool to undermine effective planning enforcement by providing an ar gument for retrospectively approving unauthorised, environmentally damaging developments. If some form of P PS24 is passed, t he following are required: The terms significant and substantial are not defined. Guidance on the definitions of these terms is necessary so that planning decisions can be made with clarity and consistency. We are opposed to the introduction of this policy. Page 3 of 3

Planning Policy Statement 17: Control of Outdoor Advertisements SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Planning Policy Statement 17: Control of Outdoor Advertisements SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES Introduction 1. On 20 th February 2004, the Department issued for consultation draft Planning Policy Statement