Mr. Philip Jones:

Section 171AK lists what should be in the scheme. There is quite a lot in there. For example, I refer to the site beside Sandymount, which was an SDZ. It had quite a lot of 3D images within the Poolbeg scheme. It is up to the local authority to do that. It may well be that there should be non-mandatory guidance and good practice guidelines from the Department on how they should be done to assist people. I agree with the architects. If it can be done with 3D modelling - I am not talking about a big model the size of the room here - simple sketches of what the scheme would envisage, that would make sense. Some people can read drawings but many more would benefit from a 3D image. The great advantage of doing that would be that the public would get to see it. If it comes initially as a framework in the development plan, the public will be aware that this will be coming onstream because that will be the initial thing, that is, the site is going to be the subject of one or more UDZs. The public would be alerted that they will have another opportunity at that point. In one sense, it rectifies the fact there is no appeal for the individual projects.

What is in 171AK with the changes I have mentioned provides some degree of assurance in that regard.

Certainly the idea that the Department can model guidance on what should be in it in visual terms as well as just in written terms would make sense. However, that is not for primary legislation. It may be for regulations and maybe guidance.