Strong objection.  While the new policy is clearer, Council has two serious concerns regarding the penultimate paragraph:

1. a) the requirement to demonstrate absence of adverse impact applies only to the ‘wider area’. This gives undesirable scope for applicants to argue that immediate negative impacts in the immediate site area are merely ‘local’ and do not really impinge on the ‘wider area’ (which is left undefined). The phrase ‘wider area’ should be replaced with ‘..of the location’, or just ‘area’.

1. b) the statement ‘Measures that will enhance biodiversity.. will be supported’ makes such measures an optional extra, and weakens the previous policy that proposals ’must result in substantial environmental improvement’.

We therefore suggest that this paragraph should read:

“Any proposal must demonstrate that it will not adversely affect the character, appearance or visual amenities and the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and the location in question, and must seek to enhance biodiversity in and around the site.”

Without these amendments, and as it stands, this policy will directly and seriously undermine Policy 28 Countryside Protection.