The Protected Landscape duty

This week, our learned friend and very experienced planning Barrister,  Anne Williams from Six Pump Court Chambers explores the new strengthened duty to “seek to further “the statutory purposes of “Protected Landscapes”.

1.         DEFRA Guidance published on 16th December last year sets out how the “Protected Landscapes” duty is intended to operate and provides broad principles to guide relevant authorities in complying with it. Section 245 (Protected Landscapes) of the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA) amends the duty on relevant authorities in respect of their functions which affect land in National Parks, National Landscapes, and the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads (collectively referred to as Protected Landscapes) in England.

2.         Relevant authorities must now “seek to further” the statutory purposes of Protected Landscapes. This replaces the previous duty on relevant authorities to “have regard to” their statutory purposes. Protected Landscapes include 10 National Parks and 34 AONBs now Protected Landscapes

3.         The duty is intended to compliment other legal duties and responsibilities by ensuring that the purposes for which Protected Landscapes are designated are recognised in reaching decisions and undertaking activities that impact these areas. Authorities must consider what is reasonable and proportionate in the context of fulfilling the duty.

4.         The new duty is quite broad and provides new proactive duties on relevant authorities.

5.         Relevant authorities include a government department or public body, any statutory undertaker or any person holding public office.

6.         Relevant authorities will need to apply the duty when undertaking any function in relation to land in a Protected Landscape. This duty may include

  • the preparation of development plans,

  • decision-making in respect of development management, planning applications and NSIPS

  • development undertaken through PD rights where prior approval on relevant planning matters is required,

  • day-to-day functions such as maintenance, the refurbishment of buildings and infrastructure and the management of land and water,

  • functions outside a Protected Landscape which may have an effect on land in a Protected Landscape,

  • the drafting of Protected Landscape Management Plans, 

  • planning appeals and public enquiries,

  • the drafting of Local Nature Recovery Strategies, 

  • other plans and spacial strategies which affect these areas such as Local Transport Plans plans, River Basin Management Plans, and Neighbourhood Plans

  • the drafting and delivery policies and strategies, operational procedures, estate management plans, contracts and work instructions which guide and control day-to-day work of the relevant authority and their agents,

  • the issuing of licenses and permits. 

7.         The duty is an active duty, not passive, which means relevant authorities should take appropriate, reasonable and proportionate steps to explore measures which further the statutory purposes of protected landscapes. As far as reasonably practical relevant authorities should seek to avoid harm and contribute to the conservation and enhancement of natural beauty, special qualities and key characteristics of protected landscapes. A relevant authority should be able to demonstrate the measures to which consideration is being given when seeking to further the statutory purposes. In other words, authorities need to provide evidence that they have complied with the duty.

8.         When seeking to further the purposes, relevant authorities should consider the information contained in a Protected Landscape Management Plan.

9.         The statutory purposes of national parks are conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the areas designated, and promoting opportunities for the understanding enjoyment of the special qualities of those areas by the public. The statutory purposes of national landscapes (areas of outstanding natural beauty) are conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area outstanding natural beauty.

The Dedham Vale Society case (Dedham Vale Society v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Transport UK East Angela Ltd February 2025). 

10.      The application of this duty was tested in a recent High Court case. The Dedham Vale Society and Campaign for National Parks have won a judicial review against the Secretary of  State, Angela Rayner, over the decision to approve the development of a significant car park extension and lighting at Manningtree Station, Essex.

11.     The Secretary of State consented to judgement in one of the first legal challenges to consider the enhanced duties to further the purpose of protected landscapes. The case concerned the application of the duty to an EIA screening decision regarding a car park extension in the Dedham Vale National landscape. The Claimant, the Dedham Vale Society, challenged the decision on the basis that the duty had not been complied with. Following a contested application to intervene, the court allowed the Campaign for National Parks (CNP) to intervene in the case. CNP is a national charity founded in 1936, dedicated to promoting national parks in England and Wales.

12.     Following receipt of the Claimant and CNP’s skeleton arguments, the Secretary of  State conceded that the failure to apply the statutory duty to seek to further the purposes of the National Landscape when making the screening decision, constituted an error of law and the outcome might have been different had it been applied.The screening question has now been remitted to the Secretary of State for determination.

13.     Last week MHCLG announced that it would consult on national policy for determining development proposals in protected landscapes this Spring.

14.     The duty is now reflected in appeal decisions. This week Planning reported a decision on a site in the Cotswolds within the Cotswolds National Landscape (CNL) for a proposed 290 home development. The appeal was dismissed for a number of reasons but in particular that the plans would “not avoid or minimise detrimental impacts” on the protected landscape.

Anne Williams

6 Pump Court

April 2025

Previous
Previous

Overview of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Next
Next

Grey Belt Guidance: More Local Decision-Making, More Partnership Opportunities