Topic: Planning, consents, powers & access

By Myrna Rickards
February 7th 2024

Consents and Stakeholders – Embracing the planning process Highlight Report

Achieving planning consent is an integral and essential part of the successful delivery of major infrastructure projects. It is often a challenging, time-consuming and costly process, the success of which can be heavily influenced by stakeholders and how projects manage these relationships, but also how they engage before, during and after the process. Many projects struggle to complete the process in a way that is experienced positively, by both the promoter and their stakeholders.

Utilising and drawing upon expert knowledge and best practices can be invaluable as projects across all industries face similar challenges. How do we take our stakeholders on the journey with us?  How do we minimise the risks of objections and delays to the planning process and maximise the likelihood of success? What does success look like?

Speakers at this event will focus on the changes to planning policy and legislation as well as exemplars of good practice.  In addition, the seminar will present the findings from a study and interviews with industry leaders across Government, transport, nuclear, renewable energy, engineering, construction and utilities – which have been undertaken by CJ Associates on behalf of the Association.  Delegates will hear valuable insights directly from these industry leaders and experts about the challenges they face in the planning process and in engaging stakeholders and the community to learn about their greatest successes.

Join us for an afternoon of informative, insightful and lively discussion.

By Myrna Rickards
February 7th 2024

Consents and Stakeholders – Embracing the planning process Full Report

Achieving planning consent is an integral and essential part of the successful delivery of major infrastructure projects. It is often a challenging, time-consuming and costly process, the success of which can be heavily influenced by stakeholders and how projects manage these relationships, but also how they engage before, during and after the process. Many projects struggle to complete the process in a way that is experienced positively, by both the promoter and their stakeholders.

Utilising and drawing upon expert knowledge and best practices can be invaluable as projects across all industries face similar challenges. How do we take our stakeholders on the journey with us?  How do we minimise the risks of objections and delays to the planning process and maximise the likelihood of success? What does success look like?

Speakers at this event will focus on the changes to planning policy and legislation as well as exemplars of good practice.  In addition, the seminar will present the findings from a study and interviews with industry leaders across Government, transport, nuclear, renewable energy, engineering, construction and utilities – which have been undertaken by CJ Associates on behalf of the Association.  Delegates will hear valuable insights directly from these industry leaders and experts about the challenges they face in the planning process and in engaging stakeholders and the community to learn about their greatest successes.

Join us for an afternoon of informative, insightful and lively discussion.

By Jonathan Norman
July 18th 2017

Projects and consents, flexibility vs. planning Full Report

The National Strategic Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime was introduced in 2008 to support the delivery of major projects of national importance. The system has worked well and has largely been supported by most users. It has introduced guaranteed timescales for achieving the Development Consent Order (DCO) and has been used for over 75 schemes.

Now that many of these projects are moving into delivery, there have been increasing concerns about the flexibility available within the DCO, which is a Parliamentary Order. The timescales for material amendments, which are made by the relevant Secretary of State, are indicative and in practice have not been met. Given the difficulty in changing the DCO this means that promoters are more tempted to take the pragmatic approach and implement the consent that they have rather than try to change it in order to try to achieve benefits of cost, innovation and improved working.

This event will discuss the issues that promoters have faced in their attempts to achieve flexibility and what methods might be used to improve this in practice. This will draw on recent research commissioned by the National Infrastructure Planning Association (NIPA) and the experience of three DCOs in different sectors – energy, highways and Thames Tideway. Why has flexibility not been sought in the process? What are the project and community costs of not addressing this issue? What changes could there be that would improve this situation? Does the government need to change its advice or are there other ways of achieving these ends?

We will hear speakers from the NIPA research project and those who have been directly involved in moving from a consent to delivery. We will also hear from those concerned with community interests – a democratic representative and a consultation consultant. Finally, there will be an opportunity to discuss these issues to provide participants with an opportunity to reflect on the challenges and the ways that could be used to introduce more flexibility into NSIP project delivery.

By Jonathan Norman
July 18th 2017

Projects and consents, flexibility vs. planning Highlight Report

The National Strategic Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime was introduced in 2008 to support the delivery of major projects of national importance. The system has worked well and has largely been supported by most users. It has introduced guaranteed timescales for achieving the Development Consent Order (DCO) and has been used for over 75 schemes.

Now that many of these projects are moving into delivery, there have been increasing concerns about the flexibility available within the DCO, which is a Parliamentary Order. The timescales for material amendments, which are made by the relevant Secretary of State, are indicative and in practice have not been met. Given the difficulty in changing the DCO this means that promoters are more tempted to take the pragmatic approach and implement the consent that they have rather than try to change it in order to try to achieve benefits of cost, innovation and improved working.

This event will discuss the issues that promoters have faced in their attempts to achieve flexibility and what methods might be used to improve this in practice. This will draw on recent research commissioned by the National Infrastructure Planning Association (NIPA) and the experience of three DCOs in different sectors – energy, highways and Thames Tideway. Why has flexibility not been sought in the process? What are the project and community costs of not addressing this issue? What changes could there be that would improve this situation? Does the government need to change its advice or are there other ways of achieving these ends?

We will hear speakers from the NIPA research project and those who have been directly involved in moving from a consent to delivery. We will also hear from those concerned with community interests – a democratic representative and a consultation consultant. Finally, there will be an opportunity to discuss these issues to provide participants with an opportunity to reflect on the challenges and the ways that could be used to introduce more flexibility into NSIP project delivery.

By Jonathan Norman
September 4th 2013

Lessons from a successful sector – UK Ports as an example Full Report

We are seeing a number of significant investments in new and existing ports around the UK.

Ownership of ports in the UK comprises a variety of private company, trust and municipal organisations, all operating on commercial principles, independently of government, and very largely without public subsidy. The private sector operates 15 of the largest 20 ports by tonnage and around two-thirds of the UK’s port traffic. Much of the tonnage handled is concentrated in a small number of ports, with the top 15 ports accounting for almost 80% of the UK’s total traffic. As travel and trade have changed over time, ships and their cargoes have developed in size, character and technology. This has necessitated the development of new very large port-side infrastructure and even deeper channels and waterways. We have witnessed both successful and unsuccessful planning applications and very determined (often overseas) clients have had to work against real time constraints.

The National Infrastructure Plan and the National Policy Statement released in 2012 marks a significant step forward for this sector. In addition to the traditional business of ports there is an imperative in many cases to adapt to and embrace opportunities such as commercial redevelopments and the interface with off-shore energy, both wind and tidal.

So why are ports considered successful? Is private ownership a contributing factor or not? Are the stakeholder relationships an input to the overall success in what are becoming thriving opportunities? The lessons learnt from this sector will offer a wide reach and insight to other business sectors.

By Jonathan Norman
February 23rd 2012

Thames Tunnel – From Lessons to Planning Full Report

London’s sewage treatment works and sewers are overloaded. This results in 39 million tonnes of raw sewage typically being discharged annually into the River Thames and puts the UK Government in breach of European legislation. The solution is the London Tideway Improvements which comprise three elements. Work has commenced on the first two namely improvements to various existing treatments works together with the construction of the 7km £635m Lee Tunnel which commenced in September 2010. The third and largest element of the solution is rapidly drawing close to gaining its “go ahead”. If successful this will result in the construction of a 22km £3.6bn tunnel 7.2m internal diameter mostly following the route of the River Thames through London from Hammersmith to Limehouse and then to Abbey Mills at Stratford.

The 2nd phase of a public consultation process for the Thames Tunnel will commence in early November 2011 and will result in a Development Consent Order application in late 2012. Gaining permission for a scheme of this magnitude in London’s urban environment will be an immense test of the efficiency and fairness of UK’s evolving planning processes involving the transition from the Infrastructure Planning Commission to the new Major Infrastructure Planning Unit.

The seminar will hear of the history of the planning and creation by Sir Joseph Balzagette of the existing Victorian sewerage infrastructure and the funding challenges that London and Parliament faced at the time of the Great Stink of 1858. The urgency to improve on this infrastructure to achieve our current environmental standards will be explained and the role of the Government in enabling the delivery of the Thames Tunnel Project.

Thames Water, UK’s largest water company, will explain the optimisation of the project and the management of the risks of delivering a major project in a regulated industry.”

By Jonathan Norman
November 17th 2010

All Change at King’s Cross – Urban Renewal and Transport Improvements Full Report

The King’s Cross area of London has enjoyed a colourful and varied history over the past 150 years, being home to the Midland Grand Hotel (the first listed building in the country), the Great Northern Hotel and the railways with which they were associated.

Suffering significant damage during the second World War, King’s Cross has been an industrial area and tended towards the being one of the less prosperous areas of London for much of the second half of the 20th century.

All that has changed now and the area is rapidly resuming its former position as a key commercial and transportation centre, being the connection point to mainland Europe and well connected to most parts of the country by underground and overground rail links in addition to the historic canal links.
It is also undergoing an exciting redevelopment and currently represents the largest area of regeneration in central London with plans for new residential and commercial property alongside state of the art educational facilities. The open square planned to the south of King’s Cross station is set to become the largest public square in London next to Trafalgar Square.
So how did this happen, what came first, the development or the transport? What were the commercial and engineering challenges that had to be overcome? What role did the various organisations play, and in what order?

This seminar seeks to lay out the story of how this massively interconnected regeneration has come about and seeks to explore lessons for other developments in the future.

The seminar will be chaired by Andy Mitchell, Programme Director Crossrail. Contributors from the organisations involved will cover the tri-partite agreement, the planning application and approvals, the interface between rail infrastructure and train operations (overground and underground), construction and the private sector investment for legacy regeneration.

By Jonathan Norman
February 24th 2009

The Planning Act 2008 Full Report

The progress of the Planning Bill through Parliament received much attention and generated much debate throughout 2008; in particular, the proposals in the Bill relating to the authorisation of nationally significant infrastructure projects by a new independent body called the Independent Planning Commission (IPC) proved to be the most controversial. Many planning commentators expressed concern at what they perceived to be an attempt to ‘fast track’ these applications at the expense of democratic accountability.
Despite these concerns, the Bill received the Royal Assent on 26 November 2008, to become the Planning Act 2008. It heralds significant changes to the way in which ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’ as defined in the Act are prepared and consented to. The Act puts in place a radical new system for these projects and it is essential that all organisations involved in national and other projects have an understanding of how the new regime will operate. This includes not only professional advisers but also promoters of the projects themselves, project managers in local and central Government and the private sector.
The cornerstone of the new system will be a series of National Policy Statements (NPSs) produced by relevant Government departments, which will set out the national policy, including the need, for the relevant infrastructure in the fields of energy, transport, water, waste water and waste. It is currently estimated that there will be 11 NPSs which will cover, amongst other areas, energy, nuclear power, national networks, ports and aviation. If an individual project falls within one or more of the thresholds for nationally significant infrastructure projects set out in the Act, then it will come before the IPC. The Act sets out the composition of the IPC, which will include a chair, at least two deputies and approximately 32 commissioners – leading individuals of standing and knowledge who will determine the application and issue a Development Consent Order. The DCO will take the place of a plethora of consents currently required for these projects.
Alongside this, the Act introduces provisions that will allow local planning authorities to introduce a community infrastructure levy (CIL). This will be a mandatory contribution payable by all development towards the infrastructure required to support development. This will impose a significant cost on development and the way in which CIL will be calculated, tested and charged will be a significant new element affecting future infrastructure projects.
Members of the MPA will benefit from participating in this half day seminar by understanding how their organisation should approach this new way of national policy formulation and approval for national infrastructure projects, how they will be funded through the CIL and how promoters of these projects should react.

By Jonathan Norman
March 13th 2000

The Newbury Bypass Full Report

The Newbury Bypass was planned and built at a time when the approach to road projects was undergoing a fundamental change: new procurement processes; environmental legislation and new police powers were all in evidence.

By Jonathan Norman
September 28th 1987

5th Annual Conference – The Planning and Inquiry Process and Infrastructure Projects Full Report

Experience and lessons from around the world of the Consents and Powers process for major projects.