'Marmite Planning' and the Public

• 
• 25th June 2008
• Quarrying
 

The public are playing a more significant role in planning decisions for quarries and recycling centres and that often means greater opposition so a sensitive and careful involvement with local communities can pay dividends, writes Nick Edwards.

At a recent public inquiry the advocate I was working with coined the phrase ‘marmite planning'. The proposal that was the cause of the of the inquiry was five wind turbines, and the phrase was used to reflect the feelings engendered by such proposals - yes you guessed it  - you either love it or loathe them. Of course, other forms of development also evoke strong feelings from local communities and minerals and waste proposals are amongst the greatest in garnering public reaction.

Its my experience that ‘the public' have had increasing involvement in the planning process and primarily this involvement is aimed at influencing decisions on planning applications and appeals. You won't be surprised to hear that in the overwhelming majority of cases ‘public involvement' has meant local opposition to schemes. 

The role of the planning system is to regulate development for the public good. In relation to minerals and waste developments - it is understood that facilities are needed to manage waste arisings in an area and that the types of facilities required are changing to reflect changing waste management practices. Similarly it is understood that minerals are essential for our quality of life. I think in general terms that most people accept that there is a need for both waste management facilities, (and in particular those that are needed to for more sustainable waste management such as recycling) and sites to provide essential minerals. The greatest public reaction is undoubtedly where proposals come forward for specific sites whether that is for an allocation within the Local Development Framework or a planning application.

So is public participation in the planning process something that developers, and the minerals and waste industries in particular should be concerned about? My own view is that this is an area where the minerals and waste industries will need to continue to respond well. Those who have been involved in the planning process will appreciate that decisions on planning applications are, in the main, made by a committee of elected members rather than planning professionals. I have come across a number of members who have significant experience of the planning system and a keen understanding of the issues and considerations including the need for development. However, inevitably there are some members who do not have that experience and/or understanding and they are perhaps more open to influence by lobbying by members of local communities opposed to projects. 

In my view the involvement of the public in the planning process is only going to increase. Statements of Community Involvement (SCI's) have been introduced as part of the suite of new measures for the preparation of new style development plan documents. These statements set out how the local authority will involve the community in the preparation of local development documents and in its handling of planning applications. Within their SCI's a number of authorities encourage applicants to consult with the local community on draft proposals prior to submission.

So what's in it for you as a developer of a potential quarry or MRF to respond in a positive fashion to such encouragement?

The benefits of community engagement are perhaps two fold and relate firstly to the flow of information from the developer to the community and secondly the response of the community and the potential to influence the scheme.

Providing information

Rumour and speculation about potential developments create uncertainty and anxiety. Human nature is such that people fear the worst and rumours serve only to exaggerate the negative. Providing accurate and timely information on what is being proposed early on in a schemes preparation and at various key stages through its development will help to scotch such rumours.

The provision of information may also serve to challenge people's perception of what is being proposed. An individual's reaction on hearing that there is a proposal nearby will depend upon what they understand that development to be and their own personal values and preferences are. How many individuals would actually know what a Materials Recovery Facility would look like or what impacts it may have on them? The provision of information on the development and safeguards and design features to minimise impacts can remove uncertainty and may allay fears. I have recently been doing some work on proposals for wind turbines - developments, which create possibly even greater polarisation of opinion. There is some research, which indicates that those living close to wind farms have much fewer concerns about them and their operation than those where they are proposed. Fears about visual impact and noise evaporate following construction and operation. The bottom line is getting the public to understand what you are proposing can reduce the opposition to your scheme.

Receiving feedback

The second advantage of involving the local community can be a genuinely valuable input into design of a scheme. We have recently obtained planning permission for a site in West Cumbria for a significant extension to a sand quarry. As part of the development of the scheme we outlined the proposals to the site liaison committee and local residents. The proposals were amended as a result of comments made at during that consultation exercise to include a second vehicular access. The provision of the access has avoided some of the principal traffic issues. Other changes to design also included greater screen planting and bunding. Reacting to comments from the local community indicates a responsive and responsible developer. In such circumstances the community can feel involved in shaping the proposal. Responding positively to suggestions from the community can not only overcome particular issues directly but also can make that community aware that you will respond positively in relation to any other issues they may have in relation to the operation of the proposal.

Engaging with the local community has its advantages but it is not a panacea for poorly conceived and/or ill-sited development. Even on appropriate sites minerals and waste developments may evoke passionate opposition from elements of the community based not on a rational assessment of impacts but on emotional reactions to particular types of proposal. For some, no amount of information will assuage their concerns and fears. Some view information provided by proponents of schemes with great suspicion and will not believe what is said. It is unfortunate that it is almost always those who are opposed to a scheme that will be the most vociferous, active and organised. Early consultation with communities can have the drawback of allowing opponents greater time to prepare their case against a scheme and to use the information you provide against you.

I believe that involvement with local communities undertaken in a sensitive and careful manner can pay dividends. You have an opportunity to allay fears and present a positive case early in the process and the local community can be a genuine asset in the development of your proposals - just don't expect to win over everybody. Planning authorities have already expressed encouragement, even expectation that proposals will be developed through consultation, so embrace it now  - it is the future.    

 

Nick Edwards is Principal Planner at Stephenson Halliday. Nick has been a local authority development control planner for 15 years and spent the last four at Stephenson Halliday, a Planning and Landscape Architecture Consultancy based in Kendal.