This assessment provides a strategic evidence base that will inform a range of other landscape evidence being developed concurrently. The assessment also provides principles that will guide general strategies to protect, enhance and create tranquillity.

This evidence base can be used to:

• Raise awareness of the importance of tranquillity for people, nature and landscapes.
• Inform the suite of landscape evidence being developed for the emerging Joint Local Plan as well as neighbourhood plans in South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse districts.
• Provide greater access to the mapped data for decision-makers and members of the public.
• Support the development of planning policy to protect and enhance the areas of high tranquillity and reduce and mitigate the impacts of negative indicators of tranquillity.

Back to top

Policy context

The NPPF (last updated in December 2023) sets out the environmental, social and economic planning policies for England [see reference [i]]. Chapter 15 of the NPPF (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment), sets out ways in which planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment.

Paragraph 191 (under Ground conditions and pollution) sets out:

Planning policies and decisions should also ensure that new development is appropriate for its location taking into account the likely effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, living conditions and the natural environment, as well as the potential sensitivity of the site or the wider area to impacts that could arise from the development. In doing so they should:

• a) mitigate and reduce to a minimum potential adverse impacts resulting from noise from new development – and avoid noise giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and the quality of life;
• b) identify and protect tranquil areas which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason; and
• c) limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity, intrinsically dark landscapes and nature conservation.

The online National Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) resource, published by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) provides further interpretation of national planning policy for the benefit of local planning authorities and planning practitioners. Tranquilly is mentioned in the section on Noise in paragraph 008 [see reference [ii]]:

What factors are relevant if seeking to identify areas of tranquillity?

For an area to justify being protected for its tranquillity, it is likely to be relatively undisturbed by noise from human sources that undermine the intrinsic character of the area. It may, for example, provide a sense of peace and quiet or a positive soundscape where natural sounds such as birdsong or flowing water are more prominent than background noise, e.g. from transport.

Consideration may be given to how existing areas of tranquillity could be further enhanced through specific improvements in soundscape, landscape design (e.g. through the provision of green infrastructure) and/or access.

[i] Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (2023) National Planning Policy Framework [online] Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65a11af7e8f5ec000f1f8c46/NPPF_December_2023.pdf

[ii] Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (2023) Planning practice guidance on Noise [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/noise–2

Back to top

Policy options

The NPPF and related PPG could have varied interpretations. Two options are presented in this section, with consideration given to the relative merits of each approach.

Designating areas of high tranquillity

One interpretation of the NPPF appears to support the designation of tranquil areas. However, there is no supporting guidance on criteria for designation or approach to defining boundaries. Identification and protection of the areas of highest tranquillity with the aim of affording these areas with additional protections poses some notable challenges. If areas are to be designated and presented on a proposals map, they will likely need to have some physical definition on the ground, and be supported by fieldwork to establish those boundaries.

This assessment has categorised all of South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse into five categories of relative tranquillity; recognising that there are potentially competing positive and negative tranquillity factors acting together in all zones:

• Zone 1: Areas of high tranquillity. These areas have high tranquillity (positive score >=10), and positive indicators of tranquillity dominate over negative ones. The negative visual and/or noise intrusion is relatively low (negative score <10)
• Zone 2: Areas of some tranquillity. These areas have high tranquillity (positive score >=10), and positive indicators of tranquillity dominate over negative ones. However there is also negative intrusion (negative score >=10)
• Zone 3: Areas of mixed tranquillity. These areas have some level of tranquillity (positive score <20), but there is also some level of negative visual and/or noise intrusion (negative score <20). In this zone positive and negative factors compete and the positive factors do not dominate over negative factors.
• Zone 4: Areas of low tranquillity. These areas have a high level of visual and/or noise intrusion and negative indicators dominate over positive ones (negative score >=20), however there is also high tranquillity (positive score >=10)
• Zone 5: Areas of very low/no tranquillity. These areas have high level of negative visual and/or noise intrusion (negative score >=20), with low level of relative tranquillity (positive score <10).

If singling out areas of high tranquillity (Zone 1) for designation, it is noticeable that parts of this zone are already protected by other designations (such as National Landscapes), so the interaction needs to be carefully considered. As can be seen in the underlying data, there are variations in levels of relative tranquillity, even within Zone 1. Furthermore, it must be noted that some areas in Zone 2 and beyond can have higher positive scores than Zone 1, but are offset by higher negative scores.

Without fieldwork to support the definition of boundaries, the boundaries would need to be based on a threshold or numeric criteria. For example, this might be a minimum size or minimum number of contiguous values over a certain threshold. This might leave out some small areas of high tranquillity that may be highly valued. As noted in the first paragraph of Considering Tranquillity in New Developments (Chapter 7), smaller pockets of high tranquillity are as important to conserve as the wider landscape-scale areas of tranquillity. Evidence developed through this study, as a desk-based assessment, cannot claim to support an understanding of which of these areas are ‘prized for their recreational and amenity value’ as a result of their tranquillity.

A high-level policy on tranquillity supported by guidance/supporting text

An alternative to the designation of specific areas of high tranquillity is a high-level policy on tranquillity supported by guidance or supporting text that focuses not only on the protection of these areas (or the prevention of harm), but can be used as a tool to ensure that protection, enhancement and creation of tranquillity is considered in every location within the districts.

Alongside the protection of areas with existing high tranquillity, it is considered important to use this evidence as a tool to lift up lower scoring areas by ensuring that developers demonstrate how tranquillity has been designed into developments – i.e. not only preventing harm to the most positive aspects contributing to tranquillity, but also designing in aspects that address or mitigate some of the less well-scoring tranquillity factors. The User Guide section in this study has been developed with this in mind.

Back to top

Policy recommendations

It is recommended that a high-level policy on tranquillity is developed, supported by reference to this assessment. In particular, referencing the mapping (which is available online for interrogation in the Results section) and User Guide, provides the strong policy recognition for enhancement and protection of tranquillity in the districts. The policy should require developers to have regard to tranquillity irrespective of the current tranquillity zone the development falls within. This could be through a requirement to consider the user guidance and explore the questions asked when describing their proposal.

By requiring use of the evidence to assess the impacts of development on tranquillity, and present how the development responds to the local circumstances, this approach aims to help developers design in elements that will enhance or create new positive factors and mitigate those that might negatively affect tranquillity.