Download to read offline
More Related Content
Similar to Day 1 Seminar_Infrastructure Planning session_FINAL_web.pptx
Day 1 Seminar_Infrastructure Planning session_FINAL_web.pptx
- 1. Strategic projects tolocal plans: Smarter infrastructure planning in a changing policy landscape 27 February 2025
- 2. Infrastructure matters (more?!) Missionled Government • Highest sustained growth in the G7 • Clean energy superpower with zero carbon electricity by 2030 Key milestones • Deliver 1.5 millions new homes - underpinned by critical infrastructure to support economic growth. • Fast track 150 major infrastructure projects • Secure home-grown energy with 95% clean power by 2030 Growth supporting infrastructure • Lack of infrastructure is a barrier to growth • Addressing local concerns for new housing • Bringing in new technologies like laboratories, gigafactories & logistics
- 3. What is infrastructure? Infrastructurerefers to the fundamental facilities, systems, and services that support communities, economic growth, and quality of life. Effective infrastructure planning ensures that development is well- supported, connected, and creates great places to live and work. Infrastructure isn’t just about size but about how systems connect and serve people at different levels. National Regional Local Site Specific
- 4. Planning Touch Points LOCALPLAN DEVELOPMENT MAJOR APPLICATIONS AND ALLOCATIONS DECISION MAKING NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS FUNDING AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
- 5. Aims of thissession 1. Understand the changing policy landscape – Explore evolving government policies and why effective infrastructure planning is crucial for delivering growth. 2. Identify key challenges for LPAs – Recognise the barriers local planning authorities face where PAS support can help. 3. Strengthen infrastructure planning in LPAs – Map existing infrastructure planning activities. Consider ways to improve coordination and governance across different scales and geographies. 4. Define next steps – Identify key takeaways and actions to implement in your authority.
- 6. Changing context: governance Thefailure of the planning regime has not just left us without the homes we need. Britain also lacks other key infrastructure …. such as transport and energy, or gigafactories and data centres needed for industries of the future. HM Government Plan for Change, December 2024 • Local Government Reorganisation move to unitary councils comprehensive local plan coverage • English Devolution Bill Combined Authorities and CCA Mayoral/CA planning powers & CIL Strategic Development Strategies • Energy system planning Strategic Spatial Energy Plans Regional Energy Strategic Plans • Capacity and funding Raised planning fees 300 new planners and Pathways to Planning
- 7. Changing context: legislation Planningand Infrastructure Bill expected March 2025 “democratic engagement” with the planning system will focus on “how, not if, homes and infrastructure are built” to “speed up and streamline the planning process”
- 8. Changes to thenational infrastructure planning regime Broadening the regime Bringing data centres, gigafactories and laboratories into NSIP regime, if requested, thru S35 Directions Raising thresholds Raising threshold for onshore wind and solar projects from 50MW to 100MW Onshore Wind Following changes in NPPF, bringing larger onshore wind projects back into the NSIP regime Cost recovery for LAs Making provision through law for host LAs to have a power to recover costs for relevant services Underpinned by up-to-date NPS, statutory guidance and more flexibility
- 9. NPPF 2024 givesgreater emphasis to: Key economic sectors inc labs, gigafactories, data centres, digital infrastructure, freight and logistics. Supporting the transition to Net Zero by 2050. Significant weight being placed on the importance of new, expanded or upgraded public service infrastructure when considering proposals for development. Golden Rules on Greenbelt development – affordable housing / necessary improvements to local or national infrastructure / accessible green spaces. Changing context: NPPF
- 10. And more tolook forward to …. The 10-year infrastructure strategy HMT led, but cross Government Overseen by National Infrastructure & service Transformation Authority Set priorities (ie projects) and pipeline of schemes for 5 years Aim to bring market stability, backed by capital budget and National Wealth Fund Comprehensive – economic and social, tie together sectoral plans Ambition to make spatial
- 11. Addressing challenges Some commonbarriers: Local capacity is tight, engaging with providers takes time Infrastructure planning is often fragmented, across different teams or scales of authority Uncertain funding for local projects and investment piecemeal Aligning local priorities & strategic schemes is challenging Challenges 1. Do you agree with our analysis? 2. What barriers do you face? 3. Are some forms of infrastructure more difficult than others?
- 12. So, what doesthis mean for us? • Planning at different scales Holistically planning across local & national infrastructure • Pro-active engagement Fostering early and ongoing collaboration with a greater range of providers • Confident delivery IDPs increasingly important to programme how and where
- 13. PAS support NSIP localauthority network • Brings together LA officers to share experience & practical support • Provides a direct link between national and local government practitioners • Develops resources and materials to help spread best practice Local authority infrastructure planning • Infrastructure delivery plans guidance, model plan and digital best practice • New tools and resources funding matrix, commissioning framework and template docs • Governance of developer contributions direct support through reviews and action planning
- 14. Strengthen infrastructure planning •Is infrastructure planning a priority for your authority? • Do you have the leadership, resources and governance structures in place? • Are you engaged in regional planning discussions and working across scales of planning? • How can your IDP work harder to deliver infrastructure?
- 15. Mapping engagement 1. Usingsticky dots, mark in the table where proactive engagement is happening in your council across different infrastructure types and planning stages. 2. Where is engagement the strongest? 3. Where are gaps and inconsistencies? Why?
- 16. Joining the dots 1.For each governance area, note what is currently happening at both local and regional/national levels. 2. Share your experiences—who is involved, what structures exist, and where engagement is working well or needs improvement. 3. Opportunities for better alignment? If so, map it! 4. Define actions – quick wins and longer-term strategies
- 17. Final thought …… Stronginfrastructure planning is essential for delivering great places. Hopefully this session has provided practical ideas to help you: ✅ Strengthen your approach to infrastructure planning ✅ Improve collaboration across all levels ✅ Identify key actions for better alignment and delivery 🎯 Your Next Step: Write down one commitment you will take forward and place it on the Action board before you leave.
Editor's Notes
- #1 RFJ
- #2 RFJ Missions published at start of election campaign and have featured in all subsequent announcements or formal state occasions like Budget, with a set of commitments and milestones in the Government’s “Plan for change” (Dec 2024) Backed up by letter from Deputy PM to all LPAs in July 24 when she talked about housing targets, but also this phrase “growth supporting infrastructure” mentioning not just infrastructure for housing but also new technologies like laboratories, gigafactories and logistics and NSIPs. This was backed up by a Green Paper on the new Industrial Strategy in September, which included Clean Energy Industries as one of eight “growth driving sectors” Clearly, the Government see infrastructure as a key means to achieving their growth and clean energy missions – integral rather than a secondary issue
- #3 RFJ National Scale – Rail networks, motorways, energy grids. Regional Scale – Major roads, strategic water supply, large hospitals. Local Scale – Schools, bus routes, local roads, parks, community hubs. Site-Specific Scale – Walking & cycling routes, play areas, green spaces. This helps illustrate that infrastructure isn’t just about size, but about how systems connect and serve people at different levels. All about supporting development and creating sustainable places
- #4 RFJ Planning system is central to delivering on this agenda – many touchpoints for LPAs, but the key areas of interaction include: Local Plan development – LPAs and infrastructure providers work together to map infrastructure needs against future growth, ensuring clear timelines for delivery and alignment with the local plan’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP). Consideration of major planning applications and site allocations – Collaboration is needed to assess and include necessary infrastructure provisions, ensuring infrastructure is factored into planning negotiations for major developments. Planning application considerations – LPAs and infrastructure providers assess the impact of development on infrastructure, ensuring that existing capacity is adequate and identifying additional infrastructure needs. Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) – Collaboration ensures that large-scale infrastructure projects align with local needs and policies, helping to address regional infrastructure requirements and beyond. Funding allocation – LPAs and infrastructure providers work together to allocate funding through developer contributions (e.g., Section 106 and CIL) and council capital funds, ensuring resources are directed to projects that meet development and community needs. We know that modern, reliable infrastructure can support economic growth, help tackle climate change and enhance the natural environment. It supports the needs of new development and helps to mitigate its impact whilst also offering access and opportunities for existing communities We know that it is a huge issues for communities and apparent legacy of under investment in delivery of infrastructure alongside new development is a huge source of concern and frustration with communities But we also need to balance this against competing demands on developer funding for example BNG, higher standards in building etc Councils therefore need to have a way of prioritising infrastructure delivery to support their corporate priorities whilst also recognising that there will not be enough funding to deliver it all Councils also need to consider infrastructure planning as a whole to ensure the development funding is a part of a bigger process of good infrastructure planning for your area and ensuring best value by drawing on different sources of funding NPPF - Respondents also mentioned that the provision of infrastructure and public services has lagged behind previous development, putting more pressure on existing provision.
- #5 RFJ There is a lot to unpack, but we have focussed on key issues/changes proposed and the work that you are already doing
- #6 GEB Is planning the problem or part of the solution? Running throughout all the Government’s announcement is also a sub-text – planning has failed, is blamed for a lack of delivery At the same time though, there is a distinct move from less planning to more planning …… locally and regionally, especially in terms of (another) attempt to plan strategically But also a much more planned approach to energy …… the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO), which was a private company within National Grid plc and made it a public company. The purpose of this new organisation, called the National Energy System Operator (NESO) is energy system planning and operations, taking a whole systems view to planning and managing the delivery of energy. NESO Is starting work on the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP) which will set out the strategic blueprint for GB’s energy system, addressing the spatial requirements for future electricity generation and storage infrastructure. Ofgem are also in the process of establishing the Regional Energy Strategic Plan policy framework that will create regional energy planning roles across GB. Led by NESO this will have “regional spokes” that will include democratically elected members from each region in their governance.
- #7 GEB – not all needed? Local government reorganization and Devolution white paper – last month Following week NPPF published Week after proposals for modernizing planning committees Planning and Infrastructure Bill expected by March 2025. “democratic engagement” with the planning system will focus on “how, not if, homes and infrastructure are built” to “speed up and streamline the planning process” Set compulsory purchase compensation rules so landowners receive “fair but not excessive” payments where important social and physical infrastructure and affordable housing is being delivered”. “modernise” planning committees “to improve local decision making”, increase local planning authorities’ capacity to “improve performance and decision making” and provide “a more predictable service to developers and investors” Development will be used to “fund nature recovery”. Consenting for major infrastructure will be “simplified”. English Devolution Bill The government will grant new planning powers to mayors and combined authorities “enhanced powers over strategic planning, local transport networks, skills, and employment support”. The bill will make it easier to create new combined and combined county authorities. The government will “unblock” local decision making through “more effective governance arrangements” The new plan-making process introduced through the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023 will include a new ‘early participation’ requirement to ensure that key stakeholders (including education authorities) are able to engage much earlier in the process and shape the vision for growth in the area.
- #8 GEB – all these changes floated over last year More recently, had some proposals for streamlining NSIP process …. 1) Reviewing National Policy Statements (NPSs) on a more regular basis - renew every NPS every 5 years and making it easier to update them in between through a new "reflective amendments." This would see material changes being made quickly in light of legislative changes, new Government policy and court decisions. 2) Protecting the role of consultation in the consenting process but making it less burdensome - this would involve four key areas of legislative change: take an "outcomes based approach" to judging compliance of pre-app consultation to allow a more targeted consultation approach and give PINS ability to judge the need for re-consultation or further engagement as proposals change; introduce a new duty on all parties to engage with each other and narrow down areas of disagreement backed up with cost recovery for this work (NB: this duty would include a host local authorities); revising requirements on consultation reports to enable a more concise and thematic summary of feedback received; and remove the requirement to consult category 3 persons (ie people who may be able to claim compensation if the development goes ahead) at the pre-app stage. 3) Supporting delivery of infrastructure post-consent - through a couple of changes designed to remove delays post consent , including: Extending the use of deemed licences (like that currently available for marine licences under Section 149A) to other forms of licensing so that they are included in the DCO, and/or introducing new guidance to encourage greater use of Section 150 so other permissions and authorisations are included in the DCO. Making it easier to amend a consented DCO by allowing a Secretary of State to publish a draft order with a two week window for minor corrections to be made easily, and removing the distinction between material and non-material post consent changes to create a single process. 4) Allowing for appropriate flexibility in the process applied to projects where this is merited - with a number of potential measures that would give flexibility to decision makers and project sponsors: A new power for a Secretary of State to direct projects that qualify as NSIPS to other consenting regimes, so that developers of projects above the NSIP thresholds can request to go through the normal TCPA or a Highways Act route instead (so in effect a reverse of the current Section 35 mechanism). Allowing some variations to the normal NSIP process for certain types of scheme, examples given are streamlining the process for more straightforward projects like solar schemes; dealing with clusters of NSIPS in one region together with joint consultations or examinations; and requiring host local authorities to work together on long linear NSIPs with a more consistent approach to issues like survey methodologies and archaeological assessments. The potential for a general power for Ministers to disapply or modify certain parts of the Planning Act 2008 (like it can already for applications made by the Crown) on a case by case basis with some clear safeguards OR to introduce a series of specific changes to the current regime. 5) Strengthening statutory guidance to ensure clarity over what is and is not required - To support all the changes outlined above, and improve the operation of the system overall, the Government is proposing to introduce a new power for the Secretary of State to make statutory guidance across the whole consenting process under the Planning Act 2008.
- #9 GEB – a subtle emphasis throughout the NPPF, raising the profile of infastructure
- #10 GEB Due to be published in June 2025 (alongside Spending Review) – this is a real attempt to provide a more planned, stable policy environment and strategic direction to reduce infrastructure costs by given greater certainty to the investment market and programme od delivery, backed up by efforts to ensure that skills and employment is available. HMT led and will sit within HMT and Cabinet Office, but be Government wide, suggesting a strong tool for HMT to shape MHCLG policy? Delivery and management will be overseen by NISTA - National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (ie the coming together of NIC IPA) Will set out priorities (ie down to the project level) and the pipeline of projects for next 5 years, looking to manage/monitor the progress of these towards delivery and refreshing pipeline regularly Looking to bring stability and confidence to market and therefore encourage investment, but also up by public investment, ie will have a capital budget that is renewed every two years alongside the Spending Review. Link to National Wealth Fund. It is also, comprehensive, takes in economic infrastructure and social infrastructure, everything from energy and water to schools and health. Will tie together sectoral plans (lie the strategic spatial plan for energy and similar for health and education) and include enabling things like skills development May or may not be spatial, there are a couple of paras on the potential pros and cons of a spatial plan and seems to be an area for discussion, but an ambition to make the plan spatial over time. NIC have been asked to look at this.
- #11 RFJ Response to NPPF: Practical challenges in securing and delivering necessary infrastructure were noted, particularly in areas with low market value. Respondents emphasised the importance of proactive planning and the need for stronger legislation or incentives to ensure that developers (and delivery partners in general) fulfilled their infrastructure delivery promises. Respondents highlighted the need for coordination with statutory agencies and community groups to ensure that infrastructure was planned in advance as much as possible. There were calls for a clearer definition of public service infrastructure, with recommendations to broaden the scope to include, among other things, green infrastructure, active travel infrastructure, libraries and GP surgeries.
- #12 GEB Recognising the ambitions, changes and challenges what does this mean for Councils? A greater need to plan holistically across different scales—from local development to major regional projects. More focus on early engagement with infrastructure providers to align investment and delivery. The role of Infrastructure Delivery Plans (IDPs) is becoming increasingly important to ensure the right infrastructure is delivered at the right time. Why Better Collaboration is Key: Effective infrastructure planning requires strong leadership within councils and clear engagement with infrastructure providers. Infrastructure planning is not just a technical exercise—it’s central to shaping successful places and securing community support for development.
- #13 GEB and RFJ Can we have just two pictures??
- #14 RFJ A lot to unpack and stuff we are waiting for But it doesn’t stop us working towards meeting these ambitions Are you making infrastructure planning a strategic priority within your authority? Do you have the leadership, resources, and governance structures in place to coordinate infrastructure effectively? Are you fully engaged in regional planning forums to align infrastructure across different scales? How can your council make better use of IDPs as a working tool rather than just a policy document?