Masterplan Consent Area Regulations: consultation responses summary

Question 3

Question 3A) We are not proposing any changes to the designations listed in schedule 5A (paragraph 3(4)). To what extent do you agree with this approach?

Responses to Question 3A are set out by respondent type in Table 3 below.

A total of 53 respondents answered this question. A majority – 67.9% of those who answered the question – strongly agreed or agreed with the approach to not make any changes to the designations listed in schedule 5A (paragraph 3(4)). 15.1% disagreed or strongly disagreed and 17% remained neutral. Organisations were more likely to agree or strongly agree than Community and Individual respondents, at 74.4% and 40% respectively. There were high levels of agreement from Planning Authorities (73.7%), the Development, Property & Land Management sector and Agents (78.6%) and Professional Representative Bodies (100%).

Question 3B) Please explain your view.

48 respondents provided further comment at Question 3B.

Summary /Themes

The responses were generally supportive with the approach to not make any changes to the designations listed in schedule 5A (paragraph 3(4)). The supportive responses noted that the existing exclusions effectively cover highly sensitive international and national designations and were subject to consultation with Key Agencies Group and agreed by the Scottish Parliament during the passage of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019.

Eight responses consisting of one Community and Individuals respondent, three Development, Property & Land Management sector & Agents, two Planning Authorities and two Third Sector respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the approach to not make any changes to the designations listed in schedule 5A (paragraph 3(4)). Some of those disagreeing suggested the designations list should also include local biodiversity networks, local wildlife sites and areas which has been notified to the planning authority by the Health and Safety Executive. Others who disagreed suggested the list should not include European Sites or World Heritage Sites.

One of the respondents who responded strongly agreed to Question 3A seemed to indicate otherwise in their response to Question 3B, stating they did not agree with the designations listed. Some other respondents who did not disagree with the proposed approach, suggested the following designations - conservation areas, listed buildings, battlefields, National Nature Reserves and proposed European sites - should be added to those listed in schedule 5A.