The eight municipalities in Nordhordland, between Bergen and Sognefjorden, have jointly prepared a proposal for an intermunicipal plan for the sea areas. The plan is currently undergoing a second consultation with a consultation deadline of 14 May this year. The fact that the municipalities are cooperating in this way for the overall best possible utilisation of the sea areas deserves credit. However, this appears as a lost opportunity for an improved locality structure and new AK areas.
Such an intermunicipal plan means that the municipalities cooperate on the case management work towards the municipal plan for the sea areas in each individual municipality. But it is the individual municipality that adopts the area plan for its own area – pursuant to the ordinary rules on the adoption of a municipal plan. The proposal that has not been sent for consultation contains to elements that will become part of the municipalities’ binding decision; a joint proposal for planning regulations (provisions) and an area plan for each individual municipality.
When the secretariat for the intermunicipal planning collaboration has summarised the input in the second consultation, the municipalities will take over the further processing of the plan. A legally binding municipality plan for the sea areas with the planning regulations must be adopted by each individual municipal council.
Each individual municipality is free in relation to the other municipalities in the region in relation to the changes the municipal council wants to make in the area planning map and the planning provisions when they adopt the plan. However, the municipality cannot make decisions about significant changes in the area use without the changed use having been subject to consultation. In that case, there will be a limited consultation round on proposed changes to the planning proposal. Smaller adjustment may, however, take place in connection with the final processing, and a significant element of the consultation round is to allow for smaller local adjustments to take place.
For the aquaculture industry, it may be a disappointment that this planning work has not identified many new aquaculture locations in the region. It seems that there are two reasons why no more new locations have been suggested, despite the fact that the political authorities clearly express a desire to invest further in the aquaculture industry in the region.
One is area use conflicts. There are many organisations and public institutions that in the first consultation round argued for restrictions for the aquaculture industry out of consideration for other interests. In reality, it is currently difficult for the aquaculture industry to meet its needs in such processes.
The second is the red traffic lights in PO 4. There are several consultation instances that use this as an argument for not giving the aquaculture industry more area, and it seems that such arguments have won out to a certain extent. The point of view that an improved locality structure can reduce lice emissions and thereby contribute to better traffic lights does not seem to have been given much emphasis. However, it is positive that the input from the aquaculture industry has led to the planning provisions removing requirements for closed technology at new or expanded facilities and that a proposal for a requirement to prepare regulation plans before the establishment of new facilities has been removed.
For the aquaculture industry, the task is now to assess which input should be made in the second consultation round and how the further final processing of the plan in each individual municipality should be followed up. It is also important to plan how to follow up the new opportunities the plan provides for new and changed locations.
So now, the industry should be on the ball until the consultation deadline on 14 May. “The devil is in the details.”
https://regionnordhordland.no/artikkel/Plan-for-sjoeareal-1665561739230
This article is published on iLaks.no.