Of course it is the local authority who will ultimately decide on planning permission for the housing estate, phone mast, waste incinerator etc that will potentially infringe the aerodrome airspace. Safeguarding therefore is basically an act of co-ordination between aerodrome and local planning authority. It is indeed the aerodrome’s responsibility to look after its own safeguarding and even the 40 or so aerodromes officially safeguarded by the CAA are being introduced to the concept of "self-safeguarding" which all other aerodromes, in theory at least, should already be aware of.

Aerodromes are encouraged to stake their claim to obstacle free airspace by lodging a safeguarding map with their local planning authority. This is an exercise best done as early as possible, and every effort needs to be made to have this map recognised and acknowledged in the local authority Structure Plan, Local Plan and Waste or Minerals Plan. In this way the planning system will in theory be able to recognise when a proposed development is likely to infringe aerodrome airspace and address the situation before it becomes a problem. In reality a certain amount of monitoring may be required in order to ensure the council consults with the aerodrome on any relevant development proposal. Trying to lodge objections to a proposed development that is already well advanced, possibly with sophisticated and well resourced developers already committed, is a good deal more difficult.

Safeguarding maps do not necessarily have to be restricted to obstacle limitation surfaces and bird strike hazards as laid down in CAP168. Other constraints, such as congested areas, engine failure on take off, Letter of Agreement can also be recorded on the safeguarding map. If a particular type of development could be a problem to an aerodrome, the advice is to highlight it on the map. The map itself need not be overly complicated, and the CAA currently produce theirs in simplified form based on an Ordnance Survey grid squares.