Masterplan Consent Area Regulations: consultation responses summary

Question 11

Question 11A) Draft Regulation 4(5) sets a 30 day period for representations if they are to be treated as valid representations. To what extent do you agree with this period?

Responses to Question 11A are set out by respondent type in Table 10 below.

A total of 52 respondents answered this question. A majority – 73.1% of those who answered the question – strongly agreed or agreed with a 30 day period for representations, while 11.5% disagreed or strongly disagreed and 15.4% remained neutral. Organisations were more likely to agree or strongly agree than Community and Individual respondents, at 63.4% and 50% respectively. There were high levels of agreement from the Development, Property & Land Management sector and Agents (85.7%), Key Agency & Other Public Sector (100%) and Planning Authorities (84.3%). The respondent groups with the highest levels of disagreement were Community and Individuals (40%) and Third Sector (66.7% / two respondents.)

Question 11B) Please explain your view.

38 respondents provided further comment at Question 11B.

Summary /Themes

The responses were generally supportive that a 30 day period would be appropriate for receiving representations to be treated as valid. The supportive responses cited the similarity to the period for planning applications and alignment with the period for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

A small number of respondents disagreed with the 30 day representation period, believing that this period would not be sufficient. Alternative suggestions for a longer period, ranged in length and included 42 days, 45 days, 6-8 weeks, 12 weeks and 6 months.

Four Development, Property & Land Management sector & Agents, two Planning Authorities and one Key Agency & Other Public Sector respondent stated that planning authorities should have discretion to extend the 30 day period, while some wanted more clarity on how planning authorities would handle request for extensions.

Related comments were provided by two Planning Authorities and one Third Sector respondent who sought clarification on what information representations would need to include to be treated as valid, as to whether representations would need to relate to material planning considerations or could raise any grounds of objection.