Masterplan Consent Area Regulations: consultation responses summary

Summary of the responses to the Masterplan Consent Area Regulations consultation.


Question 4

Question 4A) To what extent do you agree that the matters above in relation to the statement be set out in guidance rather than regulations?

Responses to Question 4A are set out by respondent type in Table 4 below.

Table 4
Group Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
Community & Individuals (10) 3 (30.0%) 1 (10.0%) 3 (30.0%) 3 (30.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Development, Property & Land Management sector & Agents (14) 1 (7.1%) 8 (57.1%) 3 (21.4%) 2 (14.3%) 0 (0.0%)
Key Agency & Other Public Sector (4) 0 (0.0%) 3 (75.0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Planning Authority (19) 5 (26.3%) 9 (47.4%) 2 (10.5%) 3 (15.8%) 0 (0.0%)
Professional Representative Bodies (3) 0 (0.0%) 2 (66.7%) 1 (33.3%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Third Sector (3) 0 (0.0%) 2 (66.7%) 1 (33.3%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Total (53) 9 (17.0%) 25 (47.2%) 11 (20.8%) 8 (15.1%) 0 (0.0%)

A total of 53 respondents answered this question. A majority – 64.2% of those who answered the question – strongly agreed or agreed with the approach to include information within guidance regarding the statement authorities have to publish as a formal record of how they have fulfilled their duty to consider preparing MCAs. 15.1% disagreed or strongly disagreed and 20.8% remained neutral. Organisations were more likely to agree or strongly agree than Community and Individual respondents, at 69.7% and 40% respectively. There were high levels of agreement from Planning Authorities (73.7%).

Question 4B) Please explain your view.

46 respondents provided further comment at Question 4B.

Summary /Themes

The responses generally supported the guidance including of information regarding the statement authorities have to publish as a formal record of how they have fulfilled their duty to consider preparing MCAs. The supportive responses cited that this approach provides greater flexibility to planning authorities and their local circumstances and also helps to limit unnecessary regulation.

However, eight responses consisting of three Community and Individuals, two Development, Property & Land Management sector & Agents and three Planning Authorities disagreed with the approach to include information within guidance regarding the statement. A reason for disagreement raised by one respondent related to the principle of the statement which they considered to be onerous and arbitrary. Disagreement around having the information in guidance rather than the regulations was that there was a risk that interpretation of the guidance could lead to greater uncertainty and different approaches being used by local planning authorities across Scotland. One Development, Property & Land Management sector & Agent response considered details should be set out in regulations in order to enforce standards.

Two Planning Authorities raised an additional point, that they considered it should not be necessary to send the statement to key agencies and community councils if they are not intending to prepare MCAs.

Contact

Email: mca@gov.scot

Back to top