| Description | The Scottish Government’s Transport directorate carried out a consultation exercise on its proposals for secondary legislation in support of the Transport and Works (Scotland) Act 2007. That Act places the Scottish Ministers at the heart of an order-making procedure for the authorisation of guided transport schemes and the construction and operation of inland waterways. |
|---|
| ISBN | (Web Only) |
|---|
| Official Print Publication Date | |
|---|
| Website Publication Date | September 27, 2007 |
|---|
ABERDEENSHIRE COUNCIL CONSULTATION RESPONSE
Annex F
TRANSPORT & WORKS ( SCOTLAND) ACT 2007
SECONDARY LEGISLATION - CONSULTATION
Summary of all questions:
Application and Objections Procedure Rules
A1. Are the consultees mentioned under rule 8(1)(e) with whom applicants are expected to consult appropriate and comprehensive? Are there any bodies that should be added to or deleted from Schedules 3 and 4?
The draft regulations appear to allow for adequate consultation with the relevant Local Authorities for all proposals and specifically with Roads Authorities for proposals affecting roads. However, we would like to see provision in Schedule 3 of Annex A for documents to be served on the Planning Authority, where authority is sought for works affecting sites safeguarded for certain uses, within a Development Plan.
A2. In respect of rule 17 we welcome views on the level of fees for applications. In the last Parliament a commitment was given that charitable organisations would not pay a fee greater than the cost of applying for a Private Bill (which is currently £1,250). We would welcome views as to whether the same level of fee for an application should apply to private developers, public developers and charitable concerns. We do not want to set a fee level that will act as a disincentive for people to come forward, nor do we want the fee level to encourage proposals that have not been well thought through and therefore welcome views on the appropriate level or levels of fees for the various classes of applicants.
No comments.
A3. Are there any inconsistencies or unintended consequences in the rules as drafted ?
No comments.
A4. What further legislative action, if any, should be taken to facilitate the effective operation of the proposed applications and objections procedure ? What opportunities exist, for example, to shorten time frames or remove activities that may be perceived as redundant ?
No comments.
Inquiries and Hearings Procedure Rules
B1. Are there any further efficiencies that could be met in terms of the timing of pre-inquiry activities without causing problems for participants ?
No comments.
B2. Do respondents agree that there is still reasonable opportunity for all interested parties to make relevant contributions at an inquiry or hearing?
No comments.
B3. Should the requirement for a statement of case be retained despite its potential to be a rephrasing of the original representation ?
No comments.
B4. Are there any inconsistencies or unintended consequences in the rules as drafted ?
No comments.
B5. What further legislative action, if any, should be taken to facilitate the effective running of inquiries and hearings ?
No comments.
Consents
C1. Are the consents as listed appropriate? Are there any other consent regimes that could be usefully incorporated within the regulations?
Consents relating to The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act, 1997 and the Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Scotland) Act, 1997 could be considered appropriate, in the sense that they should prove to be expeditious. With regard to Section 4 of Annex C, we note that Schedule 3 of Annex A provides for consultation with local authorities on hazardous substances consent.
C2. Are there any inconsistencies or unintended consequences in the regulations as drafted ?
In light of Section 5 (2) (b) of Annex C, we would expect the planning authority be listed in Schedule 3 of Annex A, and so considered as a statutory consultee under Section 8 (1) (e) of Annex A, where works affect either listed buildings or conservation areas. It is thus surprising that the planning authority is not listed in the aforementioned Schedule. It would seem appropriate to list the planning authority at 15. and 16. in Column ( 2) of Schedule 3, Annex A, particularly given the provisions of Section 11 (4) of Chapter 1 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act, 1997. In this Section of that Act, it is made clear that Scottish Ministers are to afford a planning authority a chance to make its views on an application (for listed buildings consent) known. It would thus be appropriate for it to be made clear that the planning authority is to be consulted from the start, when an application is submitted to the Scottish Ministers.
Access to Land on Application Order
D1. Does article 5 of the legislation request appropriate information? Is there too little or too much relevant information and if so what could usefully be dispensed with or be additionally required ?
No comments.
D2. Do consultees agree that the notices contained within Forms 1 and 2 provide all pertinent information in sufficient clarity as to be understandable by recipients?
No comments.
D3. Are there any inconsistencies or unintended consequences in the order as drafted ?
No comments.
D4. What further legislative action, if any, should be taken to facilitate the effective operation of the proposed procedure ?
No comments.
D5. What further legislative action, if any, should be taken to ensure that the reasons for requesting access are not merely speculative or for purposes unconnected with investigating a proposed transport development ?
No comments.
Access to Land by the Scottish Ministers Order
E1. Do consultees agree that the notices contained within Forms 1 and 2 provide all pertinent information in sufficient clarity as to be understandable by recipients?
No comments.
E2. Are there any inconsistencies or unintended consequences in the order as drafted ?
No comments.
E3. What further legislative action, if any, should be taken to facilitate the effective operation of the proposed procedure ?
No comments.
Annex H
RESPONDEE INFORMATION FORM: Consultation Paper on the secondary legislation of the Transport & Works ( Scotland ) Act 2007.
Please complete the details below and return it with your response. This will help ensure we handle your response appropriately. Thank you for your help.
Name: David Armitage
Postal Address: Roads Policy Manager, Aberdeenshire Council, Gordon House, Blackhall Road, Inverurie, AB51 3WA
1. Are you responding: (please circle Y/N)
(a) as an individual N go to Q2a/b and then Q4
(b) on behalf of a group/organisation Y go to Q3 and then Q4
INDIVIDUALS
2a. Do you agree to your response being made available to the public (in Scottish Executive library and/or on the Scottish Executive website)?
Yes (go to 2b below) Y/N
No, not at all Y/N We will treat your response as confidential
2b. Where confidentiality is not requested, we will make your response available to the public on the following basis ( please tick one of the following boxes)
Yes, make my response, name and address all available Y/N
Yes, make my response available, but not my name or address Y/N
Yes, make my response and name available, but not my address Y/N
ON BEHALF OF GROUPS OR ORGANISATIONS:
3 The name and address of your organisation will be made available to the public (in the Scottish Executive library and/or on the Scottish Executive website). Are you also content for your response to be made available?
Yes Y
No N We will treat your response as confidential
SHARING RESPONSES/FUTURE ENGAGEMENT
4 We will share your response internally with other Scottish Executive policy teams who may be addressing the issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so. Are you content for the Scottish Executive to contact you again in the future in relation to this consultation response?
Yes Y
No N