CAG were commissioned by Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire Councils to undertake a sustainability appraisal of the joint Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire draft Structure Plan 2001-2016. The key steps of the appraisal were to:

1. Prepare sustainability criteria
2. Identify key social, economic and environmental trends and pressures in the area
3. Scope the Plan strategy against the sustainability criteria
4. Scope the Plan policies against the sustainability criteria
5. Test the Plan policies against the sustainability criteria

THE SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA

Sustainable development is about meeting the needs of current generations without putting at risk the ability of future generations to meet their needs. It entails taking account of our global responsibilities, and handing on sufficient decent quality social, economic and environmental resources to future generations. It is also about identifying and meeting the needs of local communities, especially those which are most deprived.

22 criteria were selected to encapsulate sustainable development as it relates to land use planning. The criteria were grouped under the four over-arching themes of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy A Better Quality of Life, namely:

This stage of the appraisal assessed the extent to which the Plan’s Strategy takes account of the sustainability criteria. The draft Structure Plan opens with a statement on the four `main elements’ of the strategy (paragraph 1.2) and five aims that the plan policies `will seek to ensure’ (paragraph 1.3). But many of the Plan objectives are submerged within the introductory text, and frequently it is unclear whether an issue is simply being discussed, or if a clear commitment is being made. It is also good practice to explain how the objectives are supported by the Plan policies. We recommend therefore that:

The DETR guidance on Planning for Sustainable Development recommends that indicators should be identified to measure progress towards achieving Plan objectives, and that wherever feasible targets should be agreed for Plan objectives. We recommend that:

The appraisal concluded that the majority of the sustainability criteria are discussed in the Plan Strategy, although it is not always clear to what extent the discussion is stating a concern or expressing a Plan objective. Several sustainability criteria are not considered at all in the Strategy, even though many of these are covered by Plan policies. Although not every sustainability criteria needs to be mentioned in the Strategy, issues of major importance to local quality of life or global sustainable development should be highlighted. We recommend that:

The second stage of the appraisal considered how well the sustainability criteria are supported by the Structure Plan policies. Most of the criteria were broadly addressed, but the appraisal revealed many opportunities to strengthen the policies. These were considered under the four over-arching themes of A Better Quality of Life.

Each section discusses how the sustainability criteria relate to local conditions, and arrives at key aims that the Plan should address. The appraisal then considers how well the Plan policies support these aims.

The Employment Land policies provide for sufficient and suitable land to enable economic growth, but could do more to support local enterprise, encourage diversification away from declining sectors, and spread economic benefits to poorer (often remote) areas and disadvantaged groups. We therefore recommend:

The draft Structure Plan considers housing provision at some length and also discusses mitigation for loss of community facilities, provision of sport & recreation facilities, and protection of strategic access routes to the countryside. Other important aims, such as maintaining the integrity of local communities, improving access to essential facilities, enhancing community and road safety; and considering the diverse needs of the disabled, young, elderly, single people and ethnic minorities, are less well covered. We recommend:

This theme focuses on conserving energy and construction resources, and preserving undeveloped and high quality agricultural land. The draft Structure Plan encourages renewable energy facilities, advocates energy efficient siting and layout of developments, and promotes the use of sustainable construction materials. It also directs the majority of development into urban areas, favours the development of brownfield sites and protects prime agricultural land. Despite this, some untapped opportunities to conserve resources remain. We recommend:

Transport is a major contributor to local pollution and climate change emissions. The Plan policies consider reducing the need to travel and promoting walking, cycling and the use of public transport, but all of these could be strengthened. Polluting developments are not considered at all. We recommend:

Protection of designated sites, coasts and flood plains are reasonably well covered by the Plan policies, although regional landscape designations are not considered. The wider objectives of protecting and enhancing countryside character and distinctiveness, landscape quality, and biodiversity are less well covered. We recommend:

The draft Structure Plan promotes the vitality and viability of town centre economies, although this is rather lost in wider policies. The policy to protect historic and archaeological features and their settings does not specify levels of protection for features of different importance. Nor does the Plan consider the quality of the built environment. We recommend:

Policy E8 promotes waste reduction, reuse and recovery, but does not follow this through to appendix 2, which only refers to landfill. We recommend that:

This final stage of the appraisal tested the performance of individual policies against the sustainability criteria. Very few of the policies can be unequivocally described as supporting sustainable development. To some extent this is inevitable because:

But much more could be done to improve the sustainability of the policies, by:

1. More firmly guiding local plans towards sustainable options, eg. by specifying what the Local Plan’s criteria for site selection should consider.
2. Identifying sites for major employment, waste and minerals extraction operations using sustainability criteria for site selection.
3. Strengthening policies to protect and enhance the quality of the built environment, cultural heritage, biodiversity and countryside character.

Appendix 2 summarises the detailed conclusions for each policy. Where relevant this recommends strengthening of policies to give greater guidance to local plans. Much of this advice overlaps with the recommendations in section 4. In conclusion, we recommend that: