May 2015
Low Emissions Strategy Planning Working Group
Final Report June 2015
Nikola Miller
RTPI Scotland
nikola.miller@rtpi.org.uk
Contributors
Volunteers for the Planning Working Group were sought at the Scottish Transport Emissions
Partnership (STEP) Conference 2014, with the Chair seeking further contributors.
Two meetings of the Planning Working Group were held: 13 February 2015 and 20 March 2015.
Name
Organisation
1
2
Simon Bonsall
Scottish Government


Dom Callaghan
Glasgow City Council


Amanda Chisholm
Scottish Government
Katherine Lakeman
SEPA


Carol Gilbert
-
John Lamb
SEPA
Fiona Maguire
North Lanarkshire Council
Gavin Martin
City of Edinburgh Council
Iain McLellan
EP Scotland
Nikola Miller (Chair)
RTPI Scotland

Eleanor Pratt
SEPA

Stuart Sneddon
Ricardo AEA
Stephen Thomson*
Transport Scotland
David Torrance
Transport Scotland


* chair of the Transport Working Group
1






May 2015
Introduction
All of the contributors where informed that all of the Low Emissions Strategy (LES) Working Groups
intended to:


Provide comment on the LES consultation document and to provide guidance on how to
progress the LES further towards its publication; and
Drive delivery of its actions beyond the LES publication date via rolling meetings, with input
into the SUAQ steering group (who provide leadership and coordination).
Remit
The remit of the Planning Working Group was set by the Chair, and then discussed and agreed at the
first Working Group meeting.
Task
Detail
Review of current
“Development”
actions
Review each action in turn, discussing their merit, meaning and
deliverability. Determine which actions should remain, which should move
to a different section, which should be reworded, and which should be
deleted (with reasons for each).
Cross-over
Discuss actions in other sections of the LES which may relate to planning /
development.
Mission, Vision and
Objectives
Discuss the Mission, Vision and Objectives of the LES, and determine the
relevance and suitability of the “Development” objective.
Key Performance
Indicators
Discuss draft KPIs in relation to delivering the planning / development
outcomes.
2
May 2015
Review of LES Development Actions
The Planning Working Group reviewed the “Development” actions within the Consultation Draft LES.
For each action (numbered as in the list of actions on Pages 6-7 of the consultation document).
For each Action the existing wording is set out, together with the group’s determination as to whether
this action should be DELETED, REWORDED, or RELOCATED. The bullet points summarise the
discussion on each wording a
At the end, there are a number of actions listed which are suggested actions to ADD
14a
Current action wording
Proposal
Local authorities are required to take account
of the objectives and policies in the Low
Emission Strategy in preparation of
Development Plans and when undertaking
Development Management
DELETE ACTION
General comments:




14b
The LES will be a material consideration for both Development Management
and Development Planning and for Strategic Development Planning
Authorities – so we therefore need to specifically state this as an action? The
wording under 6.4 could be strengthened to state that the LES will be a
material consideration in planning decision making and policy making.
Support for the plan-led system
A stronger way to include air quality issues at local and strategic level is to
include them in national planning policy. There is then a statutory
requirement for issues set out at national level to be taken into consideration
and taken forward in LDPs and SDPs.
Requiring that the LES is taken into consideration is not strong enough, and
not as deliverable as having air quality issues embedded at the national,
strategic and local level through planning policy.
Current action wording
Proposal
The objectives and policies in the Low
Emission Strategy should be considered as
part of the Community Planning Process
RELOCATE – elsewhere in the LES
General comments:

The working group saw the involvement of Community Planning as important to the
delivery of the LES.

Single Outcome Agreements should embed air quality within outcomes.

Community Planning is governed by separate legislation from land use planning.
Therefore planning cannot deliver this action. This action should therefore be
relocated elsewhere within the LES.
3
May 2015
14c
Current action wording
Proposal
Local authorities with air quality issues to
review supplementary guidance and revise at
the next scheduled update (i) to take account
of action to approve air quality whilst (ii)
aligning with Low Emission Strategy
objectives.
REWORD ACTION
General comments:
14d

The recent letter from the Chief Planner on Supplementary Guidance states that
policies within the Local Development Plan must be clear on what ant
Supplementary Guidance will cover.

Suggest rewording the action to refer to policy within the Local Development Plan,
and Supplementary Guidance on air quality issues, and in line with the LES –
adding greater clarity to the action.
Current action wording
Proposal
Scottish Planning Policy expects planning
authorities to appraise the impact of
development plans on the transport network.
REWORD ACTION AND BRING
UPFRONT AS FIRST ACTION
General comments:
14e

This is not currently worded as an action, more of a statement

This national level action should be reworded and moved upfront to sit at the top as the
first action

Need to show the leadership role of planning at a national level, and include climate
change, health and air quality messages into LDPs

Many planners will not see air quality as their first priority, therefore to
encourage/stimulate action, this must be embedded at national level – built into climate
change or on the same level as climate change to ensure that it’s not an “add on”.

Air quality forms part of the Principle Policies within SPP, and this should trickle down to
the next tiers of the planning hierarchy and be picked up within SDPs/LDPs –
embedding air quality within each level of the planning hierarchy – national, strategic
and local.

Action should include positive wording on better articulating air quality and embedding
this within planning policy (not tacked on).
Current action wording
Proposal
RTPI to collaborate with the Strategic
Development Planning Authorities and the
Scottish Government in the development of
regional supplementary guidance on air
pollution mitigation.
DELETE ACTION
General comments:

There is no statutory requirement for SDPs to produce supplementary guidance. Will
they actually do this? If SDPs have not fully embraced air quality, how will they develop
supplementary guidance?

RTPI Scotland does not work below the national level, and therefore could not
undertake this action. RTPI does not produce guidance but seeks to influence and
research policy decisions.
4
May 2015
14f
Current action wording
Proposal
Planning authorities should ensure that
where potential air quality effects are
identified as significant during the SEA
process, the issues are considered in the
preparation of development plans.
DELETE ACTION
General comments:

14g
See NEW ACTION suggested below to replace this action.
Current action wording
Proposal
All local authorities with AQMAs should
ensure that their air quality action plans
provide clear advice on air quality
assessment and mitigation.
RELOCATE – elsewhere in LES
General comments:
14h

The way this action is worded, there is no role for planning here.

Suggested ADDITIONAL action below
Current action wording
Proposal
In developments where travel plans are
required, developers should ensure that
potential air quality impacts are addressed.
A
procedure
for
monitoring
plan
implementation should also be put in place
and reported upon.
DELETE ACTION
General comments:
14i

Are travel plans the right place for this?

NEW ACTION suggested below regarding updating PAN51 would bring in these
issues and take into account best practice.
Current action wording
Proposal
All local authorities should ensure that they
have a corporate travel plan which is
consistent with any air quality action plan.
RELOCATE – elsewhere in LES
General comments:

Planning has no input into or control over corporate travel plans for local authorities,
therefore it should not be in this section of the LES.
5
May 2015
14j
Current action wording
Proposal
Strategic Development Planning authorities
and local authorities to consider whether a
central low emission fund would be
appropriate for their circumstances; if so, a
feasibility study should be commissioned to
inform development of such a fund.
REWORD ACTION
General comments:
14k

Suggestion that Scottish Government could look into a central Low Emissions Fund
– more appropriate at national level?

How would this fund relate to individual locations or planning applications?
Current action wording
Proposal
Planning authorities should use the national
modelling methodology as a first step in
assessing the potential impact of a
development,
building
in
local
and
development
specific
monitoring
and
modelling data as appropriate.
DELETE ACTION
General comments:
14l

Training requirement for planners?

Development Plans already take into account transport impacts, as do Development
Management officers in the determination of planning applications. As new modelling
guidance emerges, this would provide a more robust evidence base for both
development planning and development management.

This modelling should be taken into account by officers when it is ready, but there will
be a training requirement to bring planners up to speed on the new modelling
techniques.
Current action wording
Proposal
Where mitigation measures are required for a
development in order to manage air quality
effects of development, in accordance with
current Scottish Government guidance on
planning and air quality, these could be
applied through conditions on a planning
permission. The use of planning obligations
may be appropriate in some circumstances.
DELETE ACTION
General comments:

Not suggesting anything that isn’t already a requirement. Don’t need this action if the
NEW suggested action on updating PAN 51 is added.
6
May 2015
Additional Actions – Development Section
The Planning Working Group has suggested a number of NEW actions which could be considered as
part of the Development section of the LES.
Proposed NEW Action
Comments
Suggest adding an action requiring Scottish
Government to review the contents of PAN 51
“Planning,
Environmental
Protection
and
Regulation”
 An update of the PAN could remove the
need for further guidance associated with the
LES, meaning all Air Quality guidance for
planning would be in the one place.
 This action would be instead of current
Actions 14h and 14l
 This could take into account best practice
and emerging good practice
 Need to set the case for this update clearly
to Scottish Government
Proposed NEW Action
Comments
Suggest adding an action on national planning
policy (NPF and SPP) future iterations to
influence
Development
Planning
and
Development Management at the local level with
regard to the LES.
None
Proposed NEW Action
Comments
Suggest adding an action to review the SEPA
guidance on Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA) to bring up to date with the LES

Proposed NEW Action
Comments
Suggest adding an action on picking up planning
issues of the Air Quality Action Plan and reflecting
these within LDP/SDP/Supplementary Guidance
 Instead of current Action 14g
7
Instead of current Action 14f
May 2015
Cross-Over Actions
Actions within the Energy section were determined important to look at from a planning perspective.
16a
Current action wording
Proposal
Local authorities are expected to ensure that
the national policy position on air quality is
taken into account when considering
bioenergy applications in their areas and
when developing local policies.
REWORD ACTION
General comments:

This action is not worded as an action, more of a statement. It’s also not clear on
instructions and who will carry out these instructions. Does “local polices” refer to
development planning?

This action is impacted upon by planning.

Applications for energy developments under 50 Mw are determined by the planning
authority as planning applications. Over this threshold, applications are determined
under the Electricity Act 1989 by Scottish Ministers.

There is an issue with Permitted Development Rights for certain biomass developments
(under 50MW). Some developments of domestic biomass boilers will not require
planning permission as the flue is permitted development and the boiler itself does not
constitute development. In some cases the flue is not high enough to disperse particles
effectively, but the planning authority has little control as the development is PD.

Do the PD rights for biomass flues need reviewed?

The Energy action in the LES needs to be flexible enough to cope with the rapidly
changing technology within this sector, therefore the wording could change to be more
flexible and refer to more than just biomass developments.

The Energy action(s) could like with the Scottish Government Heat Action Plan.

It would be useful to have a diagram showing the linkages between actions,
visually showing the links.
8
May 2015
General Comments on the LES
A number of other comments were raised by the Planning Working Group in relation to the LES:
ACTIONS




Actions should be prioritised – in terms of importance or by level (national, strategic
then local)
Actions should be SMART – deliverable, with indicators associated with the actions
Must think about what we are trying to achieve through the LES when wording the
actions.
We need to make sure that the ‘hooks’ are there within policy from national –
strategic – local level through the Actions.
MONITORING / KPIs
 Suggestion of an annual progress on the LES – the LES must be accountable, and
outcomes focussed. What is the period of review of the LES? Could this be aligned with
NPF/SPP timescales or other national policy timescales?
 A gant chart would be useful to clearly show where the LES will be over time – including
a programme explicitly stating these timescales for monitoring and review within the
LES. Including targets?
 The proposed KPIs need more work to ensure that they are achieving the right
outcomes
 The KPIs shouldn’t duplicate indicators that are dealt with under separate guidance /
legislation
 All of the indicators look at local authorities, are there other actors?
MISSION / VISION / OBJECTIVES

The Objective for development could include “placemaking” instead of or as well as
“new development” – planning is bigger than just new development, there is also
existing development and the role of protecting and enhancing the built and natural
environment.
9