I am interested in the different ways authorities have successfully, and simply, met the requirement to produce a submission policies map which " shows how the adopted policies map would be amended by the accompanying local plan, were it adopted". Early on in our plan prep. process we were advised that since this was a new plan it would be a new map and that we were not therefore required to document all the changes but we have since understood this to be incorrect advice. Our adopted policies map will be significantly different to the old proposals map it replaces and I am wondering about the simplest way of documenting all the changes - I know some have addressed this by way of a list of changes, tile by tile, and am also thinking that a by map layer ( use) might be another way but am after others' experiences since the inspector at a neighbouring authority recently flagged this up as a requirement he didn't feel many authorities had yet got to grips with. Anyone feel they have done this is a straightforward way?
Very interesting question. I can understand why you were given the original advice; the PPG is (IMHO) questionable here - if you're doing a brand new plan you're not just changing the extent or approach of existing policies but putting in place new ones that will have different application; the old map is entirely superseded (as are the old policies in the previous plan) so showing changes to it is wrongheaded. (To pour even more scorn, policies maps don't really "illustrate geographically the policies in the Local Plan" as the NPPG states - they illustrate certain areas that specific policies apply to. If you were to illustrate every single policy in your local plan your policies map would be a heady mess; how on earth would you illustrate a policy excluding backland development from residential gardens?)
Still, I think you're right that you need to do this, as the PPG should be followed. I agree that your layer-by-layer suggestion is probably the best way. Take a simple example, where the old and new policy approach is similar - town centre boundaries for example; you could simply show the old and new boundaries, or just show the changes with a dotted line or whatever. If it's more significant policy shift then you might want to make this clear by 'deleting' the previous entry on the policies map and putting the new approach as a new entry. You'll probably need some sort of commentary to describe what's happening.
We haven't yet done this for a full new Local Plan, but we did recently do a partial review which involved changes to the policies map; you can find the relevant document here. It's not perfect - I think it would have been helpful for there to be a commentary describing what's being changed.
In short, I don't think there's a straightforward way to do this. Sorry!
I note that this thread is from some time ago now and I am interested
to know if anyone has any more recent advice regarding expectations/
best practice around the format of a submissions map.
I am currently working on a Local Plan review that would see a number
of changes to the existing and adopted Policies Map, is it sufficient
at Submission stage to submit a list of the changes - with individual
maps of existing vs proposed boundary changes? From looking at a
number of recently Submitted Plans it seems most people are submitting
a full Policies Map rather than just the list of changes.
Any advice is appreciated. Thank you
I'm not aware that anyone has picked up on the issue Jamie raised on
21 April. When Stratford-on-Avon District Council submitted its Core
Strategy for examination in 2015, we produced a set of plans showing
how the Policies Map would be updated. The Inspector was happy with
this approach. We are due to consult on a Proposed Submission Site
Allocations Plan later this year and it would be helpful to know
if the approach used previously still suffices or whether Inspectors
now expect a fully amended Policies Map.