Local authority NSIP experience

Angus Walker picture-13This entry reports on local authorities that have had nationally significant infrastructure project applications in their areas.

Having given a presentation on the Planning Act 2008 regime to Kent County Council yesterday, and following Planning Inspectorate Chief Executive Simon Ridley's comment that Suffolk had nine nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) in its area at a conference on Monday, it seems timely to report on local authorities' experience of NSIPs.

Facts and figures

With the Woodside Link decision last week, there have been 27 decisions on NSIPs. Which local authority has hosted (at least partly) the most of these? It's a tie, between Suffolk and Central Bedfordshire, who both have three to their name. Central Beds actually promoted the last one, so perhaps it can claim a slim victory as the local authority with the most experience of seeing nationally significant infrastructure projects all the way through.

If one extends the table to applications that have been made - 55 now - the joint winners are Lancashire, Suffolk and North Lincolnshire, on four each. It is only when one considers all projects on the PINS list of forthcoming as well as made applications that Suffolk gets into first place on its own, but with eight rather than nine by my count. That will include projects that are a long way off or may never actually materialise, so isn't that reliable a guide to experience.

The 26 consented projects involve land in 53 local authority areas. Even single-site NSIPs seem to have an uncanny knack of straddling the boundary between two local authorities, some are in two-tier areas, and linear schemes such as highways, railways, electric lines and of course the Thames Tideway Tunnel often run through several local authorities (the latter having the record at 14). That is why the average is about two each.

A total of 93 local authorities have now had the experience of an application in their areas (an average of slightly less than two for 55 applications), however short-lived it might have been, with 20 of those having at least two.

Analysis

What does it all mean? Probably not that much, but it is an indication that NSIPs are spread throughout the country with some clusters. With the notable exception of the Thames Tideway Tunnel most infrastructure projects are in rural areas - large urban authorities such as Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds and Sheffield don't appear on the list at all. Perhaps it's because they're in rural areas and away from where people live that NSIPs tend to straddle the boundary between two authorities, because that's where the boundaries are.

The number of affected local authorities is about 20% of the total, so if you work for a local authority that has an impending NSIP, you don't have to go far to find opposite numbers at other local authorities who have been through or are going through the process. Having said that, the map on the Planning Inspectorate website does throw up a couple of areas without any NSIPs, even pending ones - around Swindon and Crawley, for example, whence you have to go a fair distance to find the nearest NSIP.

Based on yesterday's talk, here's a quick list of the main points at which a local authority gets involved. The figures at the end are approximate dates in months, where A is the application date - so A-9 means nine months before the application is made.

  • responding to consultation on an environmental scoping opinion (A-9);
  • responding to consultation on the draft Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) (A-6);
  • responding to (informal and) formal pre-application consultation (A-4);
  • advising PINS on adequacy of consultation once an application has been made (A);
  • making a relevant representation (A+2);
  • concluding a statement of common ground, if asked (A+5);
  • preparing and submitting a Local Impact Report (A+5);
  • answering questions asked by the Examining Authority in writing (A+5);
  • making a written representation (A+5);
  • making oral submissions at hearings and written summaries thereafter (A+7);
  • concluding a s106 agreement (A+8); and
  • making submissions to the Secretary of State because you didn't quite finish everything at the end of the examination (A+12).

There's never a dull moment, and month 'A+5' is probably the peak of activity for a local authority. Indeed, one wonders whether examination timetables could spread those activities out rather than having the same deadline for all of them.

As well as authorities with experience not being far away, there are also now plenty of examples of the above documents on the PINS website, and one or two of them have even been singled out as good examples.

The final bit of help is the somewhat thorny issue of planning performance agreements (PPAs). Do you as a local authority want to take the developer's shilling to help you cope with what is almost by definition a large project? Do developers want to pay local authorities for work when they are not the decision-maker? In practice, yes and yes, usually, but PPAs need to be carefully defined as to what they cover and how far along the process they go.

While no longer the decision-maker, local authorities remain the most important 'third party' in the NSIP process (and are occasionally the developer themselves, although that will be increasingly rare now the highway threshold has been raised). NSIPs are difficult to cope with as they consume resources and there is unlikely to be much experience of them in any particular area given their rarity. Nevertheless, some help is at hand, in the form of officers who have undergone the experience and can share tips, sample documents on the PINS website and financial support from developers.