The Scottish Government

Planning Advice Note: PAN 53

CLASSIFYING THE COAST FOR PLANNING PURPOSES

Introduction

1. National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG)13 indicates that, from a national perspective, the coast of Scotland can be considered as developed, undeveloped or isolated. The NPPG suggested that almost 90% of Scotland's mainland coastline could be regarded as undeveloped and that areas of isolated coast should be limited in number and extent. The categorisation is not an additional statutory designation. In the NPPG a commitment was given to elaborate on the criteria to be used in classifying the coast for planning purposes. The publication of this Planning Advice Note (PAN) fulfils this commitment.

working group

2. Following the publication of the NPPG a working group was set up. The objective of this group was to devise criteria which would enable planning authorities to take a consistent approach to classifying the coast. The group comprised representatives of 3 local authorities (Fife, Highland and latterly Dumfries and Galloway), National Coastal Forum, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Sports Council and the Scottish Office Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries Department. Planning Services Division of the Scottish Office Development Department chaired the group and acted as secretariat.

3. In addition to full meetings of the working group, a number of bilateral discussions took place. Pilot studies of the Fife and parts of the West Highland coastline were undertaken to develop and refine the initial views on the criteria to be used in the classification. The ASH Consulting Group were commissioned, in a survey funded jointly by the Scottish Office and Aberdeenshire Council, to apply the draft criteria on the Aberdeenshire coast. A copy of the consultant's report is attached. This demonstrates how the classification has been applied in one area at the strategic and local level.

classification

4. The classification seeks to provide a practical framework within which planning authorities, in their structure and local plans, can classify the coast as a basis for the promotion and control of development. The approach has to be pragmatic; it is not seen as prescriptive but should provide a coherent and consistent framework for development planning and development control which does not undermine the ability of planning authorities to respond to local circumstances.

5. In order that the recommended approach is not a burden on planning authorities, detailed survey and analysis through, for example, time consuming fieldwork is not required. Nor do authorities need to possess geographic information systems although these can serve as efficient and cost effective analytical tools. Much, if not all, of the information required should already be within local authority planning departments or it can be readily obtained from other sources such as SNH, SEPA and SSC.

6. The key point is that a completely mechanistic approach to the classification is neither desirable nor feasible. As the consultants' report shows common sense and judgement will need to be applied. A limited number of criteria are presented which should allow planning authorities to allocate most stretches of the coast fairly easily to one of the three categories. The categorisation is not, of course, a substitute for planning policy which needs to reflect local needs and potential.

defining the coast

7. In some countries, for planning purposes, the coast is regarded as being of fixed width. Consideration was given as to whether a similar approach would be appropriate to Scotland. Potentially relevant criteria included 1km limit, the 25/50 metre contour lines or an appropriate combination of both these factors However applying this approach resulted in a number of anomalies; it could, for example, result in low lying land 1km from the sea being classed as coastal although in economic or environmental terms no relationship existed with coastal or maritime activities and processes. The diversity of the Scottish coast requires a more flexible approach to be adopted. For example a very narrow strip would be appropriate on cliffed coasts as in Berwickshire or Caithness; while on the machair coast of Harris or inter-tidal mudflats at Aberlady or the Solway Firth the inland extent of coast could be defined more broadly. It is, therefore, for planning authorities to determine the landward extent of the coast and the land, the extent of the land created by coastal in their area based on direct physical, environmental and economic linkages between land and sea. Useful criteria for this might include the degree of inter-visibility between the coast and the land, the extent of land created by coastal processes and the degree to which development would impinge on the coast. In their report ASH have adopted a composite approach although features such as greenbelts or nature conservation areas can be used to demarcate different categories of coast. To ensure a consistent approach, planning authorities will require to hold discussions with neighbouring local authorities and other key interests.

8. The coast should not be regarded as including tidal rivers as this would result, for example, in the centre of Paisley being regarded as part of the coast. It relates solely to the sea and estuarial coasts. However planning authorities will wish to take account of the implications of potential sea level rise. The actual point where the division between estuaries and tidal rivers occurs is a matter for decision by planning authorities with regard to local circumstances. It should be set out in the context of local plans.

indicators

9. The coast is a continuum and the divide between the different types of coast is not always sharp or clear cut and should be based on planning judgement and common sense. The threefold classification provides a consistent basis for planning policy on the coast as well as enabling local authorities to tailor policies to particular local circumstances. For example, the classification of a stretch of coast as developed does not mean an automatic presumption in favour of development as a proposal must be assessed in relation to particular local circumstances; issues relating to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage resources, open space, siting and design have to be considered. Equally classifying an area as undeveloped does not place a moratorium on development; it simply recognises that, from a national perspective, an area is essentially undeveloped in character and is likely to remain so. As NPPG13 indicates, along the undeveloped coast, planning authorities can still put in place detailed policies to meet the development needs of the rural population as well as identifying other development opportunities directed at maintaining and enhancing the viability of dispersed communities.

Primary Indicator

10. The key or primary consideration in deciding whether a stretch of coast should be regarded as developed, undeveloped or isolated is the existence of settlements. The absence of any form of settlement, including individual farm buildings, clearly points to an area being considered for classification as isolated although this must be tempered by the secondary indicators discussed at paragraphs 12 - 14. The essential point is that such areas will be limited in number and extent; they need to be selected sparingly.

11. Size of settlement should determine whether an area is classed as developed or undeveloped. It is, however, important to recognise the role that small settlements play in remoter rural areas as centres of population, economic activity and services, where they perform important community functions which are disproportionate to their size. The classification should reflect this. In general towns with a population of 2000 or more should be regarded as falling within the developed coast but in some parts of Scotland such as Argyll, the West Highland coast and the islands, towns of 1000 population could be regarded as developed because of their importance locally.

Secondary Indicators

12. A number of secondary indicators have been devised which will further assist in determining how a stretch of coast should be classified and in determining boundaries of specific areas. These are:

• infrastructure
• industrial/commercial/power/port/military
• tourism, leisure and recreation
• offshore activity
• character
• Further details are at Figure 1 (below)

13. These indicators should serve to reinforce the framework emerging from the primary indicator; for example the presence of major infrastructure such as motorways or railways within or adjacent to a settlement can confirm an area's character as developed. The existence of extended views lacking obvious signs of human activity, either on- or off-shore and generally wild or natural in character can strengthen the argument for classifying an area as isolated. In general it is unlikely that any part of the mainland east coast of Scotland will be classed as isolated. But the presence of a large industrial/commercial/power//port/military complex in an otherwise rural area might result in a short stretch of coast in an area which might generally be regarded as undeveloped being treated as developed.

14. Authorities can, of course, choose to supplement these criteria to reflect issues such as presence of vacant or derelict land, visual influence, noise, night time illuminations etc. That is a matter for local judgement.

conclusion

15. This PAN sets out the criteria which planning authorities should use in deciding whether the coast should be regarded as developed, undeveloped or remote. The criteria have been the subject of discussion at a working group involving central government, local authorities and other interests and a pilot study carried out on the Aberdeenshire coast has demonstrated the robustness of the methodology. The advice has been agreed by the Working Group.

note

16. Enquiries about this PAN should be addressed to Jim Mackinnon (0131 244 7547). Further copies, together with other copies of PANs, NPPGs and a list of current advice and guidelines, are available Mrs Anne Williams from SODD Planning Services, Area 2-H, Victoria Quay, Edinburgh, EH6 6QQ (0131 244 7538). A copy of this PAN is also available on the Scottish Office Web site at www.scotland.gov.uk

Figure 1: Classifying the Coast for Planning Purposes

Annex

COASTAL PLANNING ZONES STUDY

ABERDEENSHIRE

FINAL REPORT

June 1998

Commissioned jointly by The Scottish Office and Aberdeenshire Council

ASH CONSULTING GROUP

UNIT 12 EDINBURGH BUSINESS CENTRE 11 MARITIME STREET EDINBURGH EH6 6SB TEL 0131 554 7619 FAX 0131 555 2572

1. INTRODUCTION

Background

National Planning Policy Guideline 13, "Coastal Planning", published in August 1997, advised that Local Authorities should classify their coast into one of three categories - developed, undeveloped, or isolated. Supplementary guidance on the criteria to be used in determining the categories of classification was prepared in draft by a group comprising representatives of the Scottish Office, Local Authorities, Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage, and the Scottish Sports Council. It was decided to undertake a pilot study funded jointly by the Scottish Office and Aberdeenshire Council to test the application of the criteria. This report has been prepared by ASH Consulting Group in response to a brief for the pilot study issued in April 1998.

Content

In accordance with the methodology submitted by ASH in the study proposal, and subsequent discussion at the briefing meeting, this report includes content as follows:

• Maps and accompanying statements identifying and justifying a system of classification of the entire coastline at the strategic level; i.e., at a scale appropriate for Structure Plan purposes;
• Maps and accompanying statements for two sample areas of coastline identifying and explaining the application of a system at the local level; i.e., to a level of detail appropriate for Local Plan purposes.

2. STRATEGIC LEVEL STUDY

Desk study

Primary Indicators

Using the latest edition Ordnance Survey 1:50,000 scale map, and population data derived from Aberdeenshire Council's Small Area Population Estimates and Forecasts, a "first level sieve" classification of the coastline was undertaken as follows.

• All settlements of < 2000 population were considered to fall into the category of undeveloped coast.

Reason

In the context of Aberdeenshire, in no instance was it considered that a settlement of 1000-2000 population merited the classification of developed relative to the economic or visual significance of settlements of greater than this size. [ NB this assumption was verified at the field study stage].

• Where the settlement size fulfilled the criterion for developed coast, all grid squares containing a part of the settlement were also considered developed.
• All settlements of > 2000 population were considered to fall into the category of developed coast.
• The minimum size of units of classification was as follows:
• developed and undeveloped coast

1 grid square (1km x 1km)

• isolated coast

5 grid squares. In addition, all isolated coast to be separated from developed coast by a minimum "buffer zone" of 1 grid square of undeveloped coast. These initial zones were plotted at 1:50,000 scale using the notation red = developed, green = undeveloped, yellow = isolated, on "working maps".

Secondary indicators

Similarly, using the OS 1:50,000 map, all secondary indicators as defined in the matrix included in the supplementary guidance notes to the NPPG were highlighted, their modifying effect on the primary indicators assessed, and any resulting changes to the initial classification plotted and noted on the "working maps". Indicators were classified as follows:

• Trunk roads, all power lines, and all railways, were considered "major" and their effect on the classification into the developed category considered.
• Industrial / Commercial / Military / Port / Power features noted on the map included:
• • communications masts eg Boddam, Rosehearty, Scotstown, St.Fergus;
  • St. Fergus gas terminal. It was considered that the extent on plan (c.2km_), merited its classification as developed although no actual settlement is present;
  • power station at Peterhead / Boddam;
  • oil terminal at Whinnyfold, near Cruden Bay.
• Tourism, Leisure and recreation features noted include:
• • golf courses, eg Duff House Royal, Cruden Bay;
  • caravan / camping sites eg Rosehearty;
  • car parks / picnic sites / viewpoints eg Water of Philorth, ;
  • coastal paths eg Bullers of Buchan.

• Offshore activity
• • Oil rigs and fish farms were not able to be identified from mapped sources. It was agreed that these were not likely to be present within the study area. With respect to application of the methodology at the national level, where they can be regarded as transient features - ie not permanent features in the landscape - it is recommended that they be excluded.
• Landscape Character
• • This indicator is not readily identifiable from the OS map without supplementary field knowledge. However, based on the presence / density of built development, and from study of the available landscape assessment report, a preliminary classification was possible.

The Desk Study Map

The resulting modified "second sieve" classifications plotted at 1:50,000 scale were then transferred to a 1:400,000 scale base ( Map 1). This scale was chosen to correspond to the Key Diagram (referred to as "not to scale") in the Grampian Structure Plan. The extent of the coastal zone is shown as a nominal 1km wide.

Reason

At Structure Plan level, the definition of areas / sections of coastline is purposefully regarded as indicative, to give flexibility at Local Plan level, and allow more detailed consideration of individual development control decisions at the site-specific scale.

From a total length of coastline of c.190 km, the resulting map ( Map 1) shows the following breakdown. [Note - these Maps are approximate only - measured at 1:400,000 scale]

It is recognised that the preliminary classification of the Rattray Head / Loch of Strathbeg area is not strictly in accordance with the supplementary guidance matrix for the following reasons:

• there are a number of individual buildings within 1km of the High Water Mark;
  one minor road extends into the zone;
• the offshore lighthouse is an obvious sign of human activity;
• extended views from the zone had yet to be verified at field study stage.

Field study

The purpose of this stage was to refine the desk study map by the addition of field observation. The same "working maps" plotted at desk study stage were taken into the field and information annotated. A photographic record was made of all significant views.

Time constraints determined that the fieldwork was almost entirely car-based, with only short walks possible to selected sites not visible from the road. The fieldwork for this stage was completed in a total of 18 hours.

The information collected falls chiefly into one of the following categories:

• assessment of the degree of impact of primary / secondary indicators identified at the desk study stage;
  identification of additional secondary indicators;
• visual information relating to definition of the coastal zone (see Section 4);
• confirmation of the "landscape character" indicator including identification / classification of extended views.

The Regional Classification Map

Map 2 shows the following classification.

[Note -these Maps are approximate only - measured at 1:400,000 scale]

Changes from Map 1 are:

1. Rattray Head / Loch of Strathbeg

9 grid squares amended from isolated to undeveloped.

Reasons:

• very significant presence and massive visual impact of MoD communications masts (not shown on OS plan) from most locations within zone.
• St. Fergus gas terminal stacks / flares are also prominent in extended views from within the zone.

[Note: from the beach itself, the height of the dunes partially screens views inland to the development features, and the linear extent of the zone gives a feeling of isolation and remoteness].

2. Peterhead / Boddam

3 grid squares amended from undeveloped to developed.

Reason:

• cumulative impact of secondary indicators: major power station, communications masts, quarries and associated derelict land, heavily-trafficked trunk route, and predominantly urban landscape character.

[Note: Further refinements were made following the Local Level Study and are described in section 3.]

3. LOCAL LEVEL STUDY

Introduction

Two areas were selected by the client for local level study:

• Area 1: St. Combs - Peterhead
• Area 2: Findon (Aberdeenshire / City of Aberdeen boundary) - Dunnottar Castle

The areas were chosen to provide investigation of the means of application of the criteria on two distinctive types of coast:

• predominantly low - lying coast with a potentially relatively broad coastal zone
• predominantly cliffed coast with a potentially relatively narrow coastal zone.

Desk Study

The study was undertaken at 1:25,000 scale. All secondary indicators were highlighted as for the strategic scale desk study. In addition, relevant designations and policy application areas were consulted in the Local Plan Proposals Maps and Settlement Maps. A composite Survey Map was produced for each area.

Field Study

For logistical reasons, Field Study work was carried out prior to the desk study, but this was not considered to have had any impact on the resulting decisions on classification. Driving mainly on the "coastal road", defined as the nearest continuous road to HWMS, and diverting onto minor roads / tracks giving access to areas not visible from the coastal road, as many as possible of the standard secondary indicators were identified, and any further candidate indicators noted. Where time permitted, short excursions were made on foot and a representative photographic record made of most sections of the coastline. Overall, the field work for both study areas; approximately 10 miles each, took around 15 hours.

Classification

Area 1: St. Combs to Peterhead (Map 3,Map 4,Map 5)

Section A - St.Combs to Rattray Head

This section has been categorised as UNDEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicator

• No settlements > 2000 population.

Secondary indicators

• No major roads / rail / power within 1km of HWMS
• No major tourism / leisure / recreation developments within 1km of HWMS
• No significant offshore activity
• Predominantly rural landscape character

Additional secondary indicators

• Multiple communications masts at Crimond Airfield wireless station have an extensive and significant visual impact
• Dominance of natural / semi-natural vegetation types: (wetland, sand-dune complex)
• High sensitivity to change evidenced by multiple protective designations at international, national, regional and local level: (SSSI, NNR, SPA, Ramsar, SINS, ARLS, ASLV)

Section B: Rattray Head to Scotstown Head

This section has been categorised as DEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicator

• No settlements of >2000 population

Secondary indicators

• Industrial

It is considered that the scale and areal extent of the St Fergus gas terminal exceeds that of many settlements which meet the criterion for developed coast. Morever, the visual impact is much more significant than a settlement of equivalent map area, and is perceived both during daylight and in darkness.

Other secondary indicators largely fall within the category of undeveloped coast, but are considered to be outweighed by the impact of the gas terminal, i.e.:

• Minor roads only within 1km of HWMS
• Low key recreational development (Scotstown Head car park - some noise generation by motor-cycles, dune buggies)
• No significant offshore activity
• Landscape character is difficult to allocate to an overall category. The dominant urban / industrial character of the gas terminal contrasts strongly with the rural naturalness of the dune system to create a very distinctive relationship rarely present elsewhere in Scotland.

Section C: Scotstown Head to Ugie Water

This section has been classified as UNDEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicator

• No settlements of >2000 population. A small number (<10) of building groups are present within 1km of HWMS.

Secondary indicators

• No major roads within 1km of HWMS. A small number (<10) of minor roads / access roads to farms are present.
• No major industrial / commercial / port / military / power developments present.
• he golf courses at Craigewan Links are the only significant tourism / leisure developments and have limited visual impact from within the zone. (From certain viewpoints, eg the south side of the Ugie at Buchanhaven, the new clubhouse building is prominent.)
• Offshore activity in the form of shipping movements to and from Peterhead harbour has limited impact as vessels are generally not visible close inshore from this section of coast.
• Character is predominantly rural. The slight change in shoreline direction immediately south of Scotstown Head results in the dune ridge screening views of St. Fergus gas terminal from the beach.

Other secondary indicators

• One communications mast present. (0.5 km south-east of Scotstown Head).
• The dune system and associated vegetation communities constitute a significant proportion of the landcover.
• The area is designated as an Area of Special Landscape Value in the Local Plan.

Definition of Coastal Zone

• Seaward Limit
• • Low Water Mark Ordinary Spring Tides (LWMS).
    Prominent headlands were used to demarcate boundaries between adjoining types of coast at this scale.

• Landward Limit

The "coastal road" was selected as the most appropriate boundary in this area for the following reasons.

• The 1km band width would bisect both Loch of Strathbeg and St. Fergus gas terminal - both of which are considered to be significant elements of the coastal zone in this area.
• The 50m contour lies too far back from the coast

Area 2: Findon to Dunnottar Castle (Map 6, Map 7, Map 8)

Section A: City of Aberdeen boundary - Earnsheugh

This section has been classified as DEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicator

• No settlements > 2000.

Secondary indicators

• Main line east coast railway Aberdeen - London
• Minor roads with heavy lorry traffic associated with landfill site at Findon
• Presence of Quarries / Landfill sites
• Intrusive views of construction site / pipeline storage site at Roadside of Findon
• Landscape character would be best described overall as "urban fringe" although the cliffscape up to around the 50m contour is relatively unspoiled by contrast.

Section B: Earnsheugh - Newtonhill Bay

This section has been classified as UNDEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicators

• No settlements > 2000 population.

Secondary indicators

• Minor roads linking villages with each other and with A90/Portlethen
• Scattered dwellings/farmsteads
• Portlethen, although of "developed" population size, (6,879) has limited visual impact on the area to the east of the railway due to local topography
• Landscape character is thus predominantly rural. Arable agricultural land is the typical landcover type with a narrow strip of uncultivated ground immediately adjacent to the cliff tops

Additional secondary indicator

• Entire area designated as Area of Regional Landscape Significance (ARLS)

Section C: Newtonhill Bay - Whiteland Head

This section has been classified as DEVELOPED

Reasons:

Primary indicators

• Settlement of >2000 population (Newtonhill 2,849)

Secondary indicators

• Predominantly urban character with built development typically extending almost to cliff top / HWMS

Section D: Whiteland Head - Cowie Harbour

This section has been classified as UNDEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicators

• No settlements >2000 population

Secondary indicators

• Minor road at Hall Heugh
• Informal coastal footpath over most of the length of the section
• Golf course at Stonehaven (Garron Point)
• Landscape character is predominantly rural, mostly lacking obvious signs of human activity. Coastal scenery impressive with steep cliffs, wave cut platforms, natural arches, stacks, and "yawns". 50m contour generally very close to HWMS.

Other secondary indicators

• Entire section designated as ARLS.

Section E: Cowie Harbour - Stonehaven Harbour (South Breakwater)

This section has been classified as DEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicators

• Settlement > 2000 (Stonehaven population 10,430)

Secondary indicators

• Dominant urban character with buildings, roads, port facilities, recreational development etc extending to HWMS.

Section F: Stonehaven Harbour - Dunnottar Castle

This section has been classified as UNDEVELOPED.

Reasons:

Primary indicator

• No settlements > 2000 population.
• No other buildings present except war memorial on Black Hill and Dunnottar Castle.

Secondary indicators

• Minor roads absent. ( Surfaced access tracks at war memorial and castle).
• Significant car park at Dunnottar Castle.
• Communications masts at Mains of Dunnottar are outside zone but are visually intrusive in landward views.
• No significant offshore activity.
• Rural landscape character . Dramatic cliff scenery with extensive exposures of Old Red Sandstone conglomerate. The two existing buildings are of distinctive heritage value.

Other secondary indicators

• Entire section designated as ARLS.

Definition of Coastal Zone

A composite approach was adopted. Starting in the north, the following features / criteria were selected:

• City boundary - Earnsheugh. The 1km width was deemed most appropriate.
• Earnsheugh - Stonehaven Golf Course. The main east coast rail line was selected. The railway coincides with the boundary of the ARLS for this stretch of coast and distinguishes the generally undeveloped coastal strip from the hinterland.
• Stonehaven Golf Course - Dunnottar Castle. The "coastal road" was selected. This defines the older maritime-influenced sector of Stonehaven itself and coincides with the ARLS boundary to the south of the town.

4. REFERENCES

1. The Scottish Office Development Department, 1997. National Planning Policy Guideline NPPG 13 Coastal Planning.

2. Aberdeenshire Council, 1998. Small Area Population Estimates and Forecasts 1998 Update.

3. Cobham Resource Consultants, 1994. Banff & Buchan Landscape Assessment. Final Report to Scottish Natural Heritage.

4. Aberdeen City Council, Aberdeenshire Council, 1997. Grampian Structure Plan Written Statement.

5. Aberdeenshire Council, 1998. The Finalised Consolidated Aberdeenshire Local Plans 1998