Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 240 proposes a new subsection (9), which provides that the board can attach to a planning permission for development in the nearshore area of a coastal planning authority, or in the outer maritime area, a condition that the person to whom the permission is granted agree points of detail with the coastal planning authority or with the board. If agreement cannot be reached with a coastal planning authority, the coastal planning authority can refer the matter to the board for determination. In the case of a permission that the board has determined, the board has the ultimate say.

This provision is related to amendment No. 221. The initiated text resulted in a situation where applications on land could have these types of conditions applied to them and applications in the maritime area could not. Clearly this anomalous situation could not be permeated into the final system and this amendment seeks to address this. The primary difference in this amendment relates to what happens in the outer maritime area, where there is of course no local planning authority. I would highlight to Deputies who are unfamiliar with the land-based planning system that such conditions are utilised frequently to address points of detail post planning and there is a great deal of precedent established as to what they can and cannot be used for. Any significant or material changes to consented developments will have to go through the processes set out in section 297, as happens at present with SID development permissions.

Amendment No. 241, as proposed by Deputy Higgins seeks, to provide that conditions can be attached to a planning permission providing that points of detail may be agreed between the MARA and the person carrying out the development. In amendment No. 240 I have proposed a related amendment, in which points of detail would be agreed between the person granted permission and the coastal planning authority or the board as the case may be; the primary difference being the absence of the MARA in my amendment. This is because the MARA has no formal role in the environmental decision-making process for development applications, as has been said previously. I would suggest that my own amendment is preferable, if Deputy Higgins is in agreement. In any event, what the Deputy is proposing here that has the same effect as my own amendment. I suggest to the Deputy that in this respect we are aligned and her intention has been satisfied.

Amendment No. 242 is a technical amendment to section 297(2) to expand the list of things that must accompany an application to alter the terms of a permission granted under section 297. These additional mandatory items from the initiated text are plans or drawings – the initiated text did not specify these; the prescribed fee for processing the application; and an environmental impact assessment report, if the proposal has already been screened in for such purposes. In addition to the mandatory requirements, this amendment further provides that the applicant may submit certain materials at the application stage, including an environmental impact assessment report or a Natura impact statement. In effect, this allows the applicant to pre-empt the screening determination by the board in respect of these assessments and would allow the board to consider these reports in the first instance. This is a common occurrence in regular planning applications and does not presuppose the outcome of any screening. Instead, it allows applicants to submit the relevant documents where they are sure any alterations would be screened in for environmental impact assessment or appropriate assessment.

Amendment No. 243 is a technical drafting amendment and is related to amendment No. 242. The purpose of this amendment to section 297(5)(d) is to expand on what is included in the definition of "relevant materials" in this section. In essence, it allows the board to take into consideration all of the things submitted by the applicant in the first instance as set out in amendment No. 242, including any environmental impact assessment report or a Natura impact statement.

Amendment No. 245 is a technical drafting amendment to delete the word "and" in order to accommodate amendment No. 246.

Amendment No. 246 is a technical drafting amendment. The purpose of this amendment is to add "relevant materials", as defined in section 297(5), to the list of things the board shall have regard to when performing its functions in relation to a requested alteration that is a material alteration. This amendment is related to amendments Nos. 242 and 243.