The AONB Unit welcomes the inclusion of a policy which specifically relates to AONBs. We are concerned however that the proposed policy offers significantly less protection to AONBs than that currently provided in policy EN5 in the current Allocations and Development Management Plan, and LO8 from the Core Strategy despite a strengthening of AONB protection in the revised NPPF and in particular paragraph 172. The policy should reflect the national importance of AONBs, which has been reaffirmed in

Green belt and ANOB preservation should be a priority. The example of wood for biomass boilers – how sustainable is the wood supply for such systems? Given concerns in London surrounding wood burning stoves and air quality the District Council needs to ensure the proposals are a long term solution and not a "flavour of the month" initiative - diesel cars are a prime example

We fully support this policy as the AONB makes a valuable contribution to the distinctive character of the district, and the protection it provides must be maintained.

2.16 Policy 3 concerns the landscape and conserving the distinctive features that contribute to the special character of the District. The policy seeks to conserve and enhance the Kent Downs and High Weald Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Paragraph 172 of the NPPF requires great weight to be given to the conservation and enhancement to the landscape and scenic beauty of National Parks and AONB. 2.17 We are supportive of this important policy and consider the development of Land a

Policy 3 – Landscape and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty Para. 1 As written, the wording suggests that all the 'distinctive features' will be protected 'where possible', which cannot, and must not, be the intention. The distinctive features must always be protected but it is accepted that they can only be enhanced where possible. We therefore propose the following wording: The landscape character of the District and the countryside, including areas of tranquillity, will be conserved and th

Policy 3 ¨C though we would suggest greater alignment with the provisions of national policy, most particularly to reflect the great weight to be given to the conservation of the scenic beauty of the AONB, the presumption that major development would be refused in the AONB save in exceptional circumstances and when the public interest is demonstrated.

In Policy 3, given that the documents referred to as ¡°relevant management plan, associated documents and position statements¡± are non-specific, should the requirement to have regard to them be included in the explanatory text instead of the policy and would it be for the Council to have regard to them in considering proposals in the AONB? 21 Given that enhancement may include, but is not limited to the list included in the policy, there is no need to include ¡°etc.¡± in the third bullet

Historic England supports the intention of this policy but suggests its scope should be widened to include explicit references to historic landscapes and the historic environment and heritage assets that make up a significant part of the distinctiveness and special character of the AONBs and rural environment of the district.

Policy 3 -Landscape and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty We suggest rephrasing the third bullet-point on enhancements to read 'supporting the rural economy' in order to make clear that it is good husbandry and rural crafts which support fine landscapes and not promoting economic growth more generally in rural areas.

SDC will be well aware that AONB designation is a greater level of protection from development than even Green Belt and therefore, Fort Halsead being located within the Kent Downs AONB benefits from this additional layer of protection. We have noted the policy set out in Policy 3 and our recommendation is that the wording 'where possible' set out at the end of the first paragraph is removed from the final policy wording adopted so that it would read; 'The Landscape Character of the District an