Scotlands Third National Planning Framework Proposed Framework Ambition Opportunity Place

Scotland’s Third National Planning Framework

Proposed Framework

Ambition • Opportunity • Place

NPF3• Builds on NPF2 (2009)• Long term spatial strategy• Formal 5 year review period• Reflects changing context

– Economic recovery– Low carbon economy– Placemaking

SPP• First consolidated in 2010• First full review of content• Ensure policy is up to date• Focus on sustainable

economic growth• Making placemaking

integral to the policy

Formal public and stakeholder consultation

April 2013

SEA Scoping Report

NPF3 Main Issues Report

Environmental Report

Proposed NPF3 SEA Update

Finalised NPF3

Launch of NPF3 Call for National Developments

September 2012

January 2014

Launch of SPP Review

Draft SPP

Finalised SPP SEA Statement

Pre- Main Issues Report Engagement

June 2014

NPF3 Parliamentary Consideration (60 days)Includes consideration of draft SPP

SPP Position Statement

SEA update open for comment

NPF and SPP in ParliamentJanuary - March 2014

SPP Position statement:• Alignment with NPF• Sustainability and planning• Engagement• Climate change• High quality, successful places• Town centres• Rural development• Delivery of housing• Onshore gas• Onshore wind

SNH

A successful, sustainable place

SNH

SNHSNH

Steve Tiesdell Collection SNH

A low carbon place

Fife Council

Retrofit Scotland

SNH

SSEPD

A natural, resilient place

SNH

CSGN SU

SNH

CSGN SU SNH

CSGN SUHistoric Scotland

SNH

A connected place

Marine Scotland

HIECSGN SU

Glasgow Airport

Proposed National Developments

Grangemouth - GuardianHIE

CSGN SU

SSEPD

CSGN SU

Glasgow Airport

Dundee Waterfront

Ravenscraig

Parliamentary consideration (60 days)

• Proposed NPF3 laid on 14 January 2014• Consideration by 4 Committees

– LGR, ICI, EET, & RACCE.• Written evidence and witness evidence sessions

– HoPS, RTPI, RIAS, RICS, planning authorities, developers, NGOs, academics and experts

• 4 ministerial evidence sessions• 4 Committee reports published 14 March 2014• Final debate 18 March 2014

Parliament’s response• Process:

– Public engagement– Parliament’s role

• Content and relationship with wider policy:– links overlap and synergies: peatland, waste, heat, sustainable patterns of development,

flooding, climate change adaptation, infrastructure investment, active travel

• National developments: – General support for proposals– Additional national developments suggested: e.g. national ecological network, rail

freight

• Overall spatial balance: – South of Scotland, rural areas, Glasgow, Aberdeen

• Wider comments on planning performance – resourcing, role and effectiveness of development plans

• SPP – Greater clarity on key issues: wind and wild land, unconventional gas– Calls for additional guidance: restoration, flooding, waste, sustainable transport

Next steps

• Have regard to Parliament’s comments• Finalise NPF3 and SPP

– Respond to Parliament– Conformity report (Participation Statement commitments)– Conclude assessments (e.g. SEA Post Adoption Statement,

HRA Record)

• Publish June 2014

Development Planning Forum

Integration of Community Planning and Development Planning

Background

• Parliamentary scrutiny of NPF3 and SPP• Local Government and Regeneration

Committee:– How will NPF3 / SPP support community

planning?– How do SOAs ensure connections between land

use and community planning

Minister for Local Government and Planning:

“I fully acknowledge there is a need to strengthen the links between land use planning and community planning. I expect this to improve….to instigate change, I will ensure that the matter is discussed at the Scottish Government’s national development planning forum in March 2014”

Scope for stronger links?

• SOAs aim to be ‘plans for place’• Shared agenda:

– Infrastructure improvements, regeneration, population change, greener and safer neighbourhoods, improved health, better services, employment, civic pride and community identity

– locality based approaches within community planning• …but requires partnership working / people to make

the links– issuing guidance is not the answer– relationships and collaboration– locally specific solutions

• Is this already happening?• Do we need to strengthen the links?• Can we demonstrate the benefits of closer

alignment?• Are there examples of how this works within

local authorities?• Would it be helpful SG to gather and share

best practice?• Other opportunities for improvement?