Métodos a utilizar

5.1 Introduction

F r o m the d i s c u s s i o n in Chapter four it is c l e a r that the town and country planning s y stem does h ave a role to play in over c o m i n g the confl i c t s b e t w e e n nature c o n s e r v a t i o n and water recreation, by m e ans

of the devel o p m e n t plan system and d e v e l o p m e n t

control process. However, it is a pparent that there is room for improvement which c ould be a c h i e v e d by

s t r e n g t h e n i n g and w idening the powers of the

p l a n n i n g system. This chapter will, there f o r e focus on ways to improve the system and for the p u r p o s e s of the disc u s s i o n will be divi d e d into four m a i n

sections: (1) W idening the powers of the p l a n n i n g

system; (2) R e c o mmendations for Local P l a n n i n g

Authorities; (3) Minerals p lanning w hich a l t h o u g h it is a function of local planning autho r i t i e s will be treated separately as it is an important issue w h i c h

merits its own section; and (4) P lanners as

M a n a g e r s .

5.2 Widening the powers of the planning system

It can be argued that widening the powers of the

town and country planning system, w o u l d open up new o p p o r t u n i t i e s for overcoming the confl i c t s b e t w e e n nature c o n s e r v a t i o n and water recreation. There are a number of ways in which this could be done, some r elat i n g to coastal or inland waters s p e c i f i c a l l y

while other suggestions are of a more general

n a t u r e .

P resently local authority control ends at the low wa t e r mark. Although Structure Plans and Local Plans can play a vital role in guiding the use of the shoreline and avoiding conflict they can only go a limited way towards the required holistic approach. For example a marina development can have ecological implications outside the low water mark. If plann i n g c ontrols were to be extended these impacts could be

taken into account at the planning a p p l i c a t i o n

stage. Greater consideration needs to be given to the r e l a t ionship between activities on land and w a t e r .

The House of Commons Environment Comm i t t e e

c o n sidered in its report (1992) that the d i v i s i o n between the planning control system at sea and on land has been the main cause of current coastal

p r otection and planning policy problems; and in

r e c o gnising this it states that harm o n i s i n g the

the basic requisite for an integrated a p p r o a c h to p l a n n i n g in the coastal zone, w h i c h is n e c e s s a r y in

o r d e r to address competing and c o n f l i c t i n g

interests. It is therefore, s u ggested that the

g o v e r n m e n t introduces legislation to extend p l a n n i n g c ontrols out to sea to the 12 mile limit to enable local plan n i n g authorities to have more control over the recreational use of coastal waters; o b v i o u s l y

this w o uld need to be tied in with m a n a g e m e n t

o b j e c t i v e s .

The gove r n m e n t has recognised that there is scope for improving local authorities control over the use of inshore waters by water sport enthusiasts, so as to make it easier to introduce zoning r e q u i r e m e n t s f r p ,different activities. This should be imple m e n t e d as soon as possible; it is plausible to suggest that if p lanning controls were to be extended out to the 12 mile limit then the zones for different water sports should be built into District Local Plans.

The Government additionally recognises, in its

response to the House of Commons E n v i r o n m e n t

Commi t t e e report (1992), the possibility of

introducing a requirement for recreational moor i n g s to receive local authority consent p a r t icularly in areas subject to heavy recreational pressures. The report should clarify, that it will be a requirement

for p l a n n i n g permission. This w o uld clearly aid the

p roc e s s of reducing conflicts b e t w e e n n a t u r e

c o n s e r v a t i o n and water recreation, as it w o u l d mean local p l a n n i n g authorities could stop further g r o w t h of m o o r i n g s in c ongested areas w h ere e n v i r o n m e n t a l

impacts are apparent.

Local p l a n n i n g authorities should a d d i t i o n a l l y have increased plan n i n g powers over the use of inland waters for water sports. There should be requ i r e m e n t

for plan n i n g permi s s i o n for all d e v e l o p m e n t

asso c i a t e d with water sports and for the actual use

of inland waters for water sports so local p l a n n i n g

a utho r i t i e s may take a strategic view of the

p r o v i s i o n for water sports in their area, and ensure that there is no conflict with nature c o n s e r v a t i o n objectives. This would enable some w ater areas to be used exclusively for water sports while others are left alone for nature cons e r v a t i o n purposes, w i t h a p r e s u m p t i o n against any recreational development.

C i r c u l a r 1/92 which removes perm i t t e d d e v e l o p m e n t