Nationally Significant Infrastructure ProjectsThe Development Consent Process
August 2018
1
Agenda
• Welcome and Introductions
• Introduction to the NSIP & DCO Process
• The Importance of Land Referencing
• BREAK
• Consultation and Engagement
• Preparing the Business Case
• Client Experience and Lessons Learned
• Outstanding Questions and Answers.
2
Amy Hallam
Introduction to NSIP & The Development Consent Order Process
3
We are leading providers of services for NSIPs
Our experts have secured a significant number of consents, including DCOs, for transport and energy projects.
4
Why Planning Act 2008?
Heathrow Terminal 5:
• Sat for 524 days
• Heard 700 witnesses
• Generated 100,000 pages of transcript
• Inquiry cost £80 million
• Eight years to reach decision.
5
Principles of Planning Act 2008
• Quicker and fairer
• Focus on national policy
• Front loaded
• Clear statutory timetable
• Predominantly written process
• Inquisitorial Examination
• DCO includes many consents required
• Decision taken out of the hands of the local planning authority.
65 consents granted and 5 refused
(5 challenged but all unsuccessful).
6
Identifying NSIPs
Different categories and thresholds are set out in the Planning
Act 2008 and Amendments.
Energy Transport Water Waste Water
Waste
7
Highways NSIPs:
Highway and Rail (NSIP) Order 2013 includes thresholds for highways and rail schemes in England
Highways
DCO can be required for road schemes depending on the following criteria:
• Highway Authority• Definition - construction or alteration or improvement
• Speed limit
• Site area• Likelihood of significant environmental effects.
8
Business or Commercial Projectsand Housing
Business or Commercial Projects
Development Consent can now be sought for
various Business or Commercial Projects
Based on economic impacts, complexity, size,
strategic importance and links to other NSIPs.
The Housing and Planning Act 2016
S160 of the Act allows an element of housing to
be included as part of the NSIP
It can include up to 500 dwellings
The development must be “on the same site, or
is next to or close to” the NSIP.
9
S35 Direction
Promoters can apply for a Direction under
S35 of the Planning Act 2008 to make a project an NSIP
The following projects have done this:
• Lake Lothing Third Crossing• Great Yarmouth Third River Crossing
• Norwich Northern Distributor Road
• The Upper Orwell Crossings• Triton Knoll Grid Connection
• International Advanced Manufacturing Park
• Silvertown Tunnel.
Case is based on:• Area benefits
• Nationally significant growth• Size and complexity
• More than one Local Planning Authority• Delivery of other NSIPs.
10
Planning Policy
Planning Policy set out in National Policy Statements (NPS):
• Not open to challenge at Examination• Where there is no NPS policy, refer to National
Planning Policy Framework
• Local Policy• Schemes that don’t align will not be granted consent
• Policy must be considered from optioneering onwards.
Energy Transport Water Waste Water
Waste
11
Pre-application Period
Environmental Impact
Assessment
Scoping
Preliminary Environmental
Information Report
Environmental Statement
Mitigation Register
Design
Areas of permanent and temporary land take or rights
Contractor input may be required
Design should be sufficient to identify
all land required
Consultation
Statement of Community Consultation
Consultation Report
Continuous engagement,
including with PINS
Statements of Common Ground
12
Application for Development Consent
• Planning Statement
• Statement of Need
• Funding Statement
• Environmental Statement (ES)
• ES Non-Technical Summary
• Mitigation Schedule
• Habitat Regulations Assessment
• Statutory Nuisance Statement
• Transport Assessment
• Flood Risk Assessment
• List of other consents required
• Draft Development Consent Order and Explanatory Memorandum
• Consultation Report and Statement of Community Consultation
• Book of Reference
• Statement of Reasons for Compulsory Purchase
• Application Plans.
13
Consultation:
Consultation should be undertaken in accordance with S.42, 47 and 48 of the Planning Act 2008.
Consultees must include:
• Statutory Bodies (Environment Agency, Natural England, Highways England, Historic England);
• Landowners and tenants to be affected;
• Neighbouring Authorities (parish, district and county);
• Local interest groups (e.g. wildlife trusts);
• Statutory undertakers; and
• The wider community.
14
Consultation:Statement of Community Consultation
• The application submission must include a
Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) and a
Consultation Report
• An SoCC sets out how the consultation will be carried out and must be agreed with the LPA in
advance.
Preliminary Environmental Information Report
• This is issued as part of the consultation
documentation to inform responses
• Can take different forms from similar to EIA
Scoping through to a draft Environmental Statement.
15
28 Days
Review of
Application
by Planning
Inspectorate
Acceptance
2 – 3 Months
• Registration of
Interested Parties
• S51 Requests for
further
information
• Pre-Examination
Meeting
Pre-Examination
To be determined by the Promoter
• Project Design
• Statutory Consultation
• Continuous
Engagement
Pre-Application
6 Months
• Inspectors questions
• Hearings
• Relevant
Representations
Examination
6 Months
• 3 months for Examining
Authority Report
• 3 months for Secretary of
Statement Decision
Decision
6 Weeks
Legal challenge
period
Post-Decision
Development Consent Order Process
16
Getting your scheme accepted
• Why is your scheme an NSIP?
• Demonstrating compliance with consultation
requirements including consultees, notices
and regard given to responses
• LPA adequacy of consultation response
• Complying with application formalities (s55
checklist)
• Describing your NSIP in the DCO and any
flexibility sought
• Demonstrating the scheme has been
assessed.
17
Pre-Examination Period:
Pre-Examination Period starts once application is accepted
• Pre-examination period is the time between
acceptance and Pre-Examination Meeting
• Applicant may be asked for additional information in that period (request known as S.51 advice)
• It can be subject to consultation under EIA
regulations if it is regarded as ‘new’ information
• ‘Rule 6’ letter issued by the Examining Authority (ExA) in advance of meeting setting out an
agenda and draft Examination timetable
• Examination in Public usually starts within six months of acceptance and takes a maximum of
six months. It can therefore be very intensive.
18
Examination Process:
• Examination in Public is a written process involving answering questions from the ExA
• Starts the day after the Pre-Examination Meeting
• Starts with ExA issuing a list of questions (the
‘Rule 8’ letter) which the applicant, LPA, Consultees and third parties must answer
• Written Representations can also be submitted by
any party
• Reponses are exchanged and all parties have a chance to comment on those answers
• More rounds of questions issued following the
same process
• Statements of Common Ground drawn up between important interested parties e.g.
Highways England, Environment Agency or the
LPA.
19
Hearings:
If ExA is not satisfied with the written submissions they will hold a hearing
There are three types of hearing:
• Development Consent Order hearings to go through wording of DCO line by line
• Issue-specific hearings to discuss topics which
are the most contentious
• Open floor hearings which are open to anyone to
air their views (often in the evening so everyone
can attend).
20
The Decision-Making Process:
Development Consent Order made by relevant Secretary of State
• Once the Examination in Public is closed by the Inspector, they will write their report in 3
months and make a recommendation
• The Report then goes to the relevant Secretary of State who decides whether to
grant the Development Consent Order in 3
months
• Like all planning decisions, it is open to legal challenge.
Chris Grayling, Secretary of State for Transport
21
Role of LPA as host
• Consultation body
• Pre-application engagement
• Local Impact Report
• Role at Examination
• Delegated responsibilities
(Discharge of Requirements)
• Take opportunities to influence.
22
Questions?
wsp.com
23
Orla Mackin
The Importance of Land Referencing
My name is Orla Mackin and I have been working in the Land services team here for just
under 4 years now. Particularly focussing on the DCO process and advising my clients on
how to navigate through the compulsory acquisition process. What I find most
interesting about this workstream, is that we play a relatively small, if crucial part of all
sectors, and as such we gain an insight into a vast array of different projects and DCO
processes. But I find myself providing similar advice to all my clients, some of which I
summarise here for the next half hour or so.
24
Why is Land Referencing Important?
Identifies the
relevant affected
partiesProduction of key
deliverables
Identifies the
land required
for acquisition
25
Consultees and potential
compensation claims
Limits of Deviation
Limits of Land to be permanently acquired
Limits of Land
to be Acquired or Used
(e.g. temporary compounds, working
space for construction)
Limits of Land to be
Permanently Acquired
(subsoil only)
Land requiredGeographical extent to works and impacts
Protection zone for tunnel –
restrictive covenants
Permanent rights for
maintenance
• So, how do I identify the land needed for acquisition?
• Once a project has been identified as needed, options identified and selected, we need to go through a
process of refining the geographical extent of land that will be required in order to construct, operate and
maintain the project.
• Where will the tracks and the operational activity be situated? These are normally identified
through limits of deviation – the extent of land within which the project is situated, allowing for
an element of flexibility within that area.
• Beyond that, what land is required to be owned permanently? Perhaps structures, works or
essential mitigation is required to compensate effects of the scheme, and the best way to secure
this is through permanent ownership and maintenance of that area.
• We need to consider different levels – perhaps varying ownership is required at subsoil or above
ground level
• And if we only take a strata of ownership at subsoil level, for example, for the tunnel, is the
integrity of the ground such that we need to protect the tunnel from any loading or excavation
above or adjacent to it – do we need additional permanent rights at the surface to restrict such
activity?
• How about other permanent rights, such as access for maintenance vehicles, or drainage. What is
the design life of our project and what maintenance activities will be required to ensure it remains
operational throughout that period?
• Next, outside of any permanent requirements, what additional land will be required to build the
project, including temporary compounds, working space during construction. What about parking
and welfare facilities for our construction staff, temporary construction access routes. Temporary
air rights to enable cranes to swing overhead to lift in structures?
• And finally, even beyond that, who else might be considered to have a potential relevant claim for
compensation, either as a result of injurious affection and an impact on their rights as a result of
the compulsory acquisition, or otherwise due to physical factors resulting from the scheme –
impacts of noise, smell, fumes, smoke, artificial lighting and discharge of substances onto the land
need to be taken into account. This can be particularly difficult at the beginning of the scheme
when survey information may not have been completed.
• Having considered all of these requirements and impacts, we need to identify all those relevant affected
parties, and are required to consult and notify everyone having completed a process of diligent inquiry in
order to identify them. We therefore set out referencing limits at the start of the project in order to start
26
this process, and we advocate starting with the widest realistic limits at the outset to reduce
the risk of rework later, or worse missing interests requiring further phases on consultation.
26
Relevant parties affected The Land Referencing Approach
Project Project Project Project startstartstartstart----upupupup
• Land referencing methodology
• Setting the referencing limits
• Integrated GIS and database
Automated Automated Automated Automated data importdata importdata importdata import
• Ensure consistency
• Land Registry direct upload
Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop referencingreferencingreferencingreferencing
• Land Registry review
• Initial site walkover
• Online and desktop investigation
• Special category land inquiries
Contact Contact Contact Contact referencingreferencingreferencingreferencing
• Land Interest Questionnaires
• Major land owners
• Site visits
• Chase-ups and follow-up enquiries
• Requests of information / notices
ConfirmatioConfirmatioConfirmatioConfirmationnnn
• Land Registry updates
• Confirmation requests
• Further follow-up activities
DeliverablesDeliverablesDeliverablesDeliverables
Diligent inquiry
So how do I identify all the relevant affected parties?
While diligent inquiry is not defined, it is required as part of the planning act to identify all interests
in land, and the process undertaken to show diligent inquiry is tested during the examination
process.
We have a tried and tested process that has been accepted on numerous DCOs based on a long
history and wide experience of undertaking land referencing work. While simplified this diagram
sets out the key stages. We set up a prescribed methodology and set the referencing limits at the
outset. An integrated land referencing database is key for this process as it records the data as well
as the full audit trail to prove the required inquiries have been made. Land reg used as a basis for
the information, setting up a GIS to map out land information spatially as a jigsaw of boundaries.
We add to this dataset with various sources of desktop information, populating the database with
as much available information as possible before making contact with identified land interests
directly through the use of questionnaires, site visits and follow up inquiries. Just before the data is
required, we undertake a confirmation process, updating any changes in Land Reg records and, if
appropriate, recontacting land interests to check we still have their information correct. This all
feeds into a range of deliverables, required at different stages of the project
27
Land Referencing as facilitator for delivery
Whole planning and delivery lifecycle
Early
stakeholder
engagement
Informal consultation
& survey access
Formal
consultation
Scheme design input & property acquisition
negotiations
Application
submission
Book of Reference,
Notices, Schedules &
Plans
Consideration
Support at examination and ongoing negotiations
Post-approval
Early works access, land acquisition
notifications
Scheme
completion
Registration of title and disposal of
land
Tried and tested
GIS database
Specialist land
information
management
expertise
Track record in
approval process
regime
Collaborative
partnership
approach
Complementary
capabilities:
consultation, land
agency, planning
Information
securityInnovation
Underpinned by key attributes
So what do we need to produce?
This information feeds into a range of deliverables, from the identification of land interests for
stakeholder engagement and survey access negotiation at the very start of the project, through the
requirements to consult fully with all interested parties and into the key DCO deliverable for the land
referencing team, the land plans and Book of Reference, submitted as part of the application process.
But the requirements for this information don’t stop at application submission, as notices need to be
issued and representations managed throughout the consideration and examination period until the
DCO is made and the project is awarded in compulsory acquisition notices. At this stage we will need
to refresh all of that land information again (as things change) in order to serve compulsory acquisition
notices on affected parties in order to gain access to the land and begin construction. Finally once the
final design has been completed, and perhaps even continuing until after the project has been built,
the process will only be complete on the registration of the relevant land in the name of your
organisation.
In summary, the land acquisition and compulsory purchase process of identifying the land you require
and the parties that hold an interest in that land is one of the first activities to start once you have a
line on a plan of your preferred route. Running from stakeholder engagement and gaining initial access
to land for surveys right through to ensuring diligent inquiry is achieved in order to consult with all
affected parties and submit application documents. But the process continues through the
consideration with PINS right through to the acquisition of land through compulsory purchase notices
and the final registration of the acquired land with the Land Regsitry.
These are underpinned by key attributes to avoid the pitfalls, such as ensuring a database is in place to
manage land information as well as the audit trail behind it to ensure we remain robust to challenge, a
robust methodology to ensure that a process of diligent inquiry has been followed including starting
with a wide geographical scope that is reduced down as the project requirements and effects are
refined and understood, And finally a collaborative approach tpo bring theensuring the land
referencing team is part of the wider project team to input into the design and share knowledge from
other infrastructure projects
28
Land referencing – avoiding pitfalls and risks
RisksRisksRisksRisks MitigationMitigationMitigationMitigation
Interests are missed
Accuracy and currency of land
interests
Limited response / engagement
Stakeholder concerns
RisksRisksRisksRisks MitigationMitigationMitigationMitigation
Interests are missedInterests are missedInterests are missedInterests are missed - Robust, tried and tested methodology
- Tested database to record full audit trail
Accuracy and currency of land
interests
Limited response / engagement
Stakeholder concerns
So how do we avoid the pitfalls?
In my view, there are 5 key risks relating to the land referencing process
Recording the audit trail
GIS / Database
Consultation team
Legal team
Client team
Property team
Land referencing teamStakeholders
30
Land referencing – avoiding pitfalls and risks
RisksRisksRisksRisks MitigationMitigationMitigationMitigation
Interests are missed - Robust, tried and tested methodology
- Tested GIS to record full audit trail
AccuracyAccuracyAccuracyAccuracy and currency of land and currency of land and currency of land and currency of land
interestsinterestsinterestsinterests
- Regular confirmation exercises ahead of milestones
- Land Registry contract to purchase updates
- Continuous automated and manual validation/review
Limited response / engagement
Stakeholder concerns
Land referencing – avoiding pitfalls and risks
RisksRisksRisksRisks MitigationMitigationMitigationMitigation
Interests are missed - Robust, tried and tested methodology
- Tested GIS to record full audit trail
Accuracy and currency of land
interests
- Regular confirmation exercises ahead of milestones
- Land Registry contract to purchase updates
- Continuous automated and manual validation/review
Limited response /Limited response /Limited response /Limited response / engagementengagementengagementengagement - Choice of response methods
- Chase-up visits / enquiries to all properties / landowners
- Aligned with consultation strategy
Stakeholder concerns
Land referencing – avoiding pitfalls and risks
RisksRisksRisksRisks MitigationMitigationMitigationMitigation
Interests are missed - Robust, tried and tested methodology
- Tested GIS to record full audit trail
Accuracy and currency of land
interests
- Regular confirmation exercises ahead of milestones
- Land Registry contract to purchase updates
- Continuous automated and manual validation/review
Limited response / engagement - Choice of response methods
- Chase-up visits / enquiries to all properties / landowners
- Aligned with consultation strategy
Stakeholder concerns Stakeholder concerns Stakeholder concerns Stakeholder concerns - Trained team in sensitivity in conducting land referencing
exercises
- Consistent and agreed approaches and messages
Questions?
wsp.com
34
Break
Refreshments Available
35
Steve Charman
Consultation and Engagement for Development Consent Orders
36
37
DCO consultation and engagement
Pre-application
Post Decision
Acceptance
Pre-examination
Examination
Decision
Pre-application consultation(Sections 42 to 50 of the Planning Act 2008)
• Consultation with relevant consultees and local
communities
• Appropriate publicity
• Statement of Community Consultation
• Consultation report
Statements of Common Ground(Planning Inspectorate best practice)
Continued stakeholder issues management• Issues resolution
• Evidence-base of engagement and dialogue
• Support for hearings and production of materials for
examination deadlines
Consultation under the Planning Act 2008 follows much of the same best practice of
other planning regimes, however it is important to understand the appropriate
requirements, terminology, timelines and potential risks for all stages of the
Development Consent Order process, in order to be able to plan ahead.
The further you go into DCO stages, the less control you have over timelines (e.g.
examination is a fixed 6 month process) which highlights the importance of “front-
loading” stakeholder engagement and working towards resolving issues and concerns at
an early stage.
SoCGs are not prescribed under the Act but generally requested by PINS at some point
in the application. These can be started as early as wanted (e.g. could be submitted as
part of the application), and can form part of examination deadline requirements.
37
38
Recent WSP DCO’s
Thames Tideway Tunnel
Hinkley Point C Nuclear Power Station (advisor to Somerset County Council)
North Killingholme Power Project
Progress Power Station
Knottingley Power Project
A19 / A1058 Coast Road Junction
A30 Temple to Higher Carblake
Improvement Scheme
Drax Power Station
A303 Amesbury to Berwick Down
Hereford Transport Package
A27 Arundel
A1 Northumberland
A1 Birtley to Colehouse
Upper Orwell Crossings
Granted
In progress
38
39
Planning Act 2008 sets out who needs to be consulted:
Section 42(1)(a) Prescribed consultees
Section 42(1)(b) Host and neighbouring local authorities
Section 42(1)(c) Greater London Authority
Section 42(1)(d) Land interests
Applicant should exercise due diligence in identifying all relevant consultees and following Section 42 consultation requirements.
Section 42 “Duty to consult”
Lincolnshire CC
Responsibility• Production of consultation
strategy• Stakeholder mapping
WSP Responsibility• Data management (PinPoint)• Land referencing
• Distribution of consultation letters (direct from PinPoint)
Pre-application
39
40
We can use PinPoint to record and manage all stakeholder data
− Up-to-date contacts
− Correspondence log
− One source of stakeholder information for consistency
− Automated production of consultation letters
Fully auditable record of stakeholder engagement
Integrated system for all project team
WSP Stakeholder data management
Throughout
programme
40
41
− Preparing a Statement of Community Consultation (including local authority input)
− How the applicant proposes to consult about the proposals with people living in the vicinity of the land
− Publishing the SoCC
− Carrying out the consultation as set out in the SoCC
Section 47 “Duty to consult local community”
Lincolnshire CC
Responsibility• Production of SoCC
• SoCC Publicity• Press releases and briefings
WSP Responsibility• Production of consultation
materials
• DCO advisory role
Pre-application
41
42
− Publishing a notice (known as a Section 48 Notice) to publicise:
− Intention to submit an application
− A summary of the proposals
− Details of how to respond to the publicity
− To be published in national newspapers
− Reaching the ‘general public’
Section 48 “Duty to publicise”
Lincolnshire CC
Responsibility• Section 48 Notice production
and publicity
WSP Responsibility• DCO advisory role
Pre-application
42
43
− Production of the DCO consultation report ready for application submission
− Demonstrating regard to all relevant responses under Sections 42, 47 and 48
− Requested format and structure can lead to extensive and detailed consultation reports
Section 49 “Duty to take account of responses to consultation and publicity”
Lincolnshire CC
Responsibility• Section 48 Notice production
and publicity
WSP Responsibility• Coding framework• Analysis of consultation
responses (PinPoint)• Production of DCO
Consultation Report
Pre-application
43
44
PinPoint consultation analysis
Response break down by theme and
issue
Flexibility in logging multiple themes for
one response
Analysis reports and outputs once data is
inputted
Pre-application
44
45
Once an application has been accepted for examination by the Planning Inspectorate, the applicant must give notice of this acceptance
− Inform consultees of how they can register as interested parties
− Provide details of the application
Section 56 “Notifying persons of accepted application”
Lincolnshire CC
Responsibility• Production of Section 56
Notice
WSP Responsibility• Production and distribution of
Section 56 Notice (based on
PinPoint updated data)
Acceptance
45
46
− Document to outline areas of agreement (or disagreement) between the applicant and a stakeholder
− Prepared jointly with a stakeholder(s)
− Not a statutory requirement, but can support the Examining Authority’s understanding of stakeholder issues (and how these are being resolved)
Statements of Common GroundVarious stages
(pre-application
through to
examination
dependent on
programme)
Lincolnshire CC
Responsibility• Stakeholder relationship
owners
WSP Responsibility• PinPoint objection
management
46
Questions?
wsp.com
47
Kate Emerson
Preparing the Business Case
48
Business Cases
Why we do Business Cases
What to include in a Business Case
How Business Cases fit with DCO process
Kate Emerson – Associate Director WSP
49
Need for propriety in use of public money –Parliament/HMT/Judiciary set boundaries
Overarching Guidance Includes
Business Cases – Why we do them?
‘Judge over
your shoulder’
Managing Public Money – Oct 2007 http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/mpm_whole.pdfThe Green Book - 2003 http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/green_book_complete.pdfJudge Over Your Shoulder – Jan 2006 http://www.tsol.gov.uk/Publications/judge.pdf
Managing Public Money provides guidance on how public funds will managed and
ensures that they are used for the purposes intended. Public servants have a duty to use
public money responsibly – this guidance ensures this is the case. Much of what
managing public money requires is just good common sense, or sound financial
management. There are also some specific rules and conventions about how certain
things are handled, which ensure that policies, programmes and projects work smoothly
and serve their intended purposes.
The Green Book is guidance issued by HM Treasury on how to appraise policies,
programmes and projects (that is making an ex-ante assessment of the costs and
benefits of an intervention). It also provides guidance on the design and use of
monitoring and evaluation before, during and after implementation. For transport,
WebTAG – the Department for Transport’s guidance on scheme assessment provides a
specific interpretation of the Green Book in the context of transport schemes.
Judge Over Your Shoulder provides guidance to help understand the key litigation
procedures, offer practical advice, and help to public servants and those involved in
assessing the impact of public expenditure to be better placed to anticipate questions or
deal with evidence. Provides details of the legal context etc.
50
Business Cases – Why we do them?
Why do we do business cases?
• To ensure that the outcome of projects is in line with relevant strategies and policies
• To ensure that users of public services receive an efficient and effective service
• Demonstrate ‘Value for Money’ of the proposal
• To ensure that projects are viable, affordable and deliverable
• To re-assure stakeholders of proper process
To make sure we clearly articulate how the project will deliver the required objectives
identified and solve the problem at hand – and in doing so we can demonstrate how it
fits with existing polices and strategies.
Makes sure that public services are delivered in an effective and efficient manner.
Shows that the benefits of an intervention outweigh its costs – demonstrating the value
for money of the proposal.
Makes sure we have evidence to show that projects are viable and deliverable and
budget is available.
Shows all stakeholders – including the public – that an appropriate process is being
followed.
51
Business Cases – Why we do them?
A Business Case is:-
• A management tool to help solve problems
• A description of analysis
• A record of how decisions have been made
• A reassurance of proper process
It is not (or should not be):-
• An unnecessary imposition to stop expenditure
• Solely a means to get approval
• A solution looking for a problem to solve
What the Business Case is:
Tool to help solve problems – whereby you can clearly identify problems/objectives and
show how the project addresses these.
Provides a clear description of the analysis and any uncertainties in that and any risks
involved.
As previously mentioned – gives reassurance about the processes followed – both for
project team and a range of stakeholders – clearly recoding the whole process.
What the Business Case isn’t:
Often there is a perception that it is a an unnecessary imposition to stop expenditure – it
is not – it is about due process and recoding that process.
It is not just an approval process – although will often be the route to approval of
funding – however it fulfils a number of other requirements as already highlighted.
Should not be a retro-fitted process – so in solving the problem the steps in the Business
Case should lead to the solution.
52
Business Case – What is in it?
Business Cases are made up of five individual case elements:
• Strategic Case – case for change and fit with wider public policy
• Economic Case – demonstrating value for money
• Commercial Case – is the proposal commercially viable
• Financial Case – is the proposal affordable
• Management Case – is the proposal achievable and how will it be delivered
Strategic Case Economic Case Commercial Case Financial Case Management Case
Business Case is made up of 5 elements:
Strategic Case – which is the case for change
Economic Case – weighs up benefits and costs of a proposal
Commercial Case – shows that the proposal is commercially viable
Financial Case – shows that the proposal is affordable
Management Case – provides information about the management structures and
delivery process for the scheme.
Guidance on the developing The Transport Business Case is available on DfT’s website.
53
Business Case – What is in it?Business Cases usually have three stages:
• Strategic Outline – leads up to first investment decision point
• Outline – includes full economic and financial information
• Full – All Cases complete including detailed contract management
There are usually 3 stages to business cases:
SOBC – leads to first investment decision point – here Strategic Case will be substantially
complete – including problem identification, the range of solutions tested and the fit
with policy shown. The other cases will be less well developed at this stage.
OBC – significant further work will have been completed on VfM in the Economic Case
and Commercial/Financial and Management cases will have been fleshed out further.
FBC – all cases completed – including details of contractual issues, finalised costs – with
the scheme ready for procurement.
54
Business Case – What is in it?
• Problem Identification – what is it like now and how will the situation change in the future
• Drivers for change – policy; new technology; public views; legislation, etc.
• Objectives – SMART to solve the problem; fit with wider policy objectives
• Constraints – technology; environment; delivery
• Stakeholders – who are they; contribution to project; conflicts
• Options – what have been identified; risks associated with each; how does preferred option best deliver against objectives etc.
The Case for Change
SMART – Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant and Time bound
55
Business Case – What is in it?
• Assumptions – how has Value for Money been assessed (WebTAG)
• Sensitivity and Risk – how sensitive are outputs to input assumptions; quantification through sensitivity testing
• Appraisal Summary Table (AST) – provides details of impacts across the economy, environment, social and public accounts
• Distributional Impacts – how do the impacts play out for different area/societal groups
• Value for Money – comparison of costs and benefits (including monetised, indicatively monetised and non monetised – using the benefit cost ratio – BCR – as a starting point) to establish a Value for Money Category
Value for Money
56
Business Case – What is in it?
• Output Specification – what is being bought
• Procurement Strategy – how is it being bought, and how does this deliver what is required from Strategic/Economic Cases
• Sourcing Options – what are the options for provision of services
Commercial Viability
Affordability
• Costs – detail breakdown; profile; risk
• Budget – detail of budget and funding cover
• Accounting implications – impact on balance sheet
57
Business Case – What is in it?
• Previous success – evidence of delivering similar projects
• Programme – set out deliverables/timing and dependencies
• Governance – organisational structure; describe roles/lines of accountability
• Assurance and approval – Details of key approval / assurance milestones (e.g. gateway reviews)
• Stakeholder plan – strategy for stakeholder management and wider communications
• Risk Management – details of risk management process and effectiveness in application to date
• Benefits Realisation – set out approach to managing benefits and ensuring delivery of benefits
• Monitoring and Evaluation – summarise arrangements
• Contingency – detail any fall-back plans
Deliverability
58
Business Case – Fit with DCO process
Business Case DCO
Strategic Case:
Problems
Objectives
Strategic Fit
How scheme meets objectives
Stakeholder support
Case for the Scheme / Planning Statement
Transport Assessment
Statement of CommonGround
The various elements of the business case have a clear read across to the DCO process.
From the Strategic Case – the full range of items included will also be relevant for the
Statement of Case and/or Planning Statement.
The analysis included in the Strategic Case that shows how the scheme meets its
objectives will be relevant to the Transport Assessment in the DCO process.
Stakeholder analysis has a direct read across to the Statement of Common Ground
59
Business Case – Fit with DCO process
Business Case DCO
Economic Case:
BCR and VfM
WebTAG Social Impacts
WebTAG Environmental Assessment
Distributional Impacts
Economics Report
Transport Assessment
Preliminary Environmental Information Report / Environmental Statement
Equalities Impact Assessment
The analysis underpinning the Economic Case including BCR and Value for Money will
feed into an Economics Report and the Transport Assessment – as will the Social Impacts
analysis element of the Economic Case.
The Environmental Assessment in the Economic Case has a direct read across to the
PEIR and ES – although the work for DCO will likely be more detailed.
Distributional Impacts analysis will directly read across to the Equalities Impact
Assessment.
60
Business Case – Fit with DCO process
Business Case DCO
Financial Case:
Affordability Funding Statement
• Business Case can be part of DCO submission.
• Commercial Case – Procurement strategy - needed to procure
contractors
• Management Case – Set up of project board etc.; consultation
processes and stakeholder management.
The evidence included in the Financial Case directly reads across to Funding Statement
for DCO.
It should also be noted that although the Business Case isn’t ‘required’ for DCO
submission – it can be included.
Both the Commercial Case and Management Cases include evidence on deliverability in
terms of procurement strategy and management structure / consultation processes and
these will be important considerations in delivery of the project.
61
− DfT have told us on more than one occasion that the scheme promoter should be leading in developing the business case and then go looking for funding/financing
− Evidence base has to be robust
− Need for close engagement with funding bodies to agree proportional approaches to appraisal
− Deliverability
− Development Partnering? Is this an option for Lincolnshire?
− It’s not all about the economics. Wider Impacts HIF etc
− Environment, Planning, Deliverability, Design
− WE NEED TO BE SHOVEL READY
Funding Infrastructure
62
63
• Better Bus Areas
• Accelerating Innovation in rail
• Maintenance
• Highways England pinch point programme
• Rail Industry R&D Funding
• Major Schemes Programme
• Smart Ticketing
• Local Sustainable Transport Fund
• Integrated block transport
• Growing Places Fund
• Rural Economy Grant Scheme
• Local Pinch Point Fund
• Green Deal
• Growth In Transport Fund
• Major schemes programmes
• National Productivity Fund
• Access Fund
• Large Local Majors
• RIS2
• Major Roads Funding/National Road Fund
• Tax Incremental Financing
• Community Infrastructure Levy
• S106
• Prudential Borrowing
• Private Finance Initiative
• Local Asset Backed Vehicles
• Infra Funds
• Enterprise Zones
• Bonds
• Regional Growth Fund
• Prudential Borrowing
• Better Bus Areas
• Accelerating Innovation in rail
• Maintenance
• Highways Agency pinch point programme
• Rail Industry R&D Funding
Blended Funding Packages?
63
Questions?
wsp.com
64
Amy Hallam
Client Experience and Lessons Learned
65
Lessons learned: Programme
Identify Design Freeze at following milestones:
• Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping
• Statutory Consultation (Preliminary Environmental Information Report)
• Application Submission.
Know what level of design you intend to have
for submission.
Ensure that all ‘dependencies’ are identified
as there are lots of interrelationships between
documents.
Build in time for review and printing.
Be mindful of the timing of elections.
Cannot undertake pre-application stage in
haste – it should take as long as it takes to get it right!
66
28 Days
Review of
Application by
Planning
Inspectorate
Acceptance
2 – 3 Months
• Registration of
Interested Parties
• S51 Requests for
further information
• Pre-Examination
Meeting
Pre-Examination
To be determined by the Promoter
• Project Design
• Statutory Consultation
• Continuous Engagement
Pre-Application
6 Months
• Inspectors questions
• Hearings
• Relevant Representations
Examination
6 Months
• 3 months for Examining
Authority Report
• 3 months for Secretary of
Statement Decision
Decision
6 Weeks
Legal challenge
period
Post-Decision
Development Consent Order Process
67
Lessons learned: Project Management
• What are the reporting procedures?
• Who is the project sponsor?
• What delegated decisions are required and what are Member decisions?
• Who is the project manager?
• Who are the specialist leads?
• Financial reporting and procedure.
68
Lessons learned: Application
• Do not be afraid of preparing bespoke application
documents to support case
e.g. Design and Access Statement
• Understand responsibility for
delivering the scheme e.g. who will be discharging the
Requirements
• Include as many documents as
you can up front e.g. CEMP, CTMP, WSI to avoid
unnecessary Requirements.
This Photo by Unknown Author
is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA.
69
Lessons learned: Flexibility
National Infrastructure Planning Association published report in 2017 on design vs flexibility: https://www.nipa-uk.org/uploads/news/(UCL)_Morphet_and_Clifford_-_NIPA_Main_Report_-_June_2017.pdf
Some flexibility (limits of deviation) essential:
• Need sufficient land to deliver scheme (and rights to access or acquire it)
• Need to justify compulsory acquisition• Can have parameters in DCO (maximum and
minimum)• DCO application can include ‘alternative options’
e.g. M20 J10A.
Can use Non-Material Amendment process but no time limit on decisions.
Hinkley Point C about to make a material amendment application where timescale more fixed.
70
Lesson learned: Consultation and Engagement
• Communication with PINS pre-application invaluable
• Contact plans with consultees helpful (PINS template)
• Front-load consultation with statutory bodies (both national and local representatives)
• Engagement with landowners and businesses affected will reduce third party objections
• Not just about numbers – one person may have a valid issue whereas 100 people may not
• Make clear to public what they can influence
• Consultation team and Land Referencing team need to work together (use of Pinpoint)
• Use Statements of Common Ground
• Plan for two rounds of statutory consultation even if not needed
• Consultation Report needs the right lead author who understands the project and the process.
71
Lessons learned: Risks
• Changes to Order Limits and robust consultation is essential for acceptance of the application
• Top Judicial Review risk - poor interpretation of planning policy. Not just a tick box exercise
• Need to clearly justify choices in alternatives assessment.
72
Lessons learned: Examination
• Examination in Public is resource intensive and team need to be resilient
• Site visit should be well resourced – ExA
needs to go away understanding the
scheme
• Need to be organised as answering questions needs fast review and
turnaround.
73
Lessons learned: Construction
Look ahead to construction:
• Early contractor advice on what is deliverable on
the ground to minimise post-decision changes
• Don’t ‘over-commit’ to mitigation
• Allow enough space within Order Limits for temporary works
• Use mitigation register effectively and link back
to DCO
• Handover between preliminary and detailed design
• Start discharging requirements ASAP.
74
Lessons learned: Requirements
• Requirements should be drafted by planners and consultees and reviewed by
lawyers
• Try to avoid “work shall not commence until…”
• Segment works packages in all
Requirements
• Be precise
• Accept any changes ExA proposes.
75
Questions
?
Your Lincolnshire Highways Alliance contact:Richard Hardesty ([email protected])
Talk to WSP’s DCO team:
Amy Hallam ([email protected]) Exeter
Vicky Moran ([email protected]) Manchester
Marcus Wood ([email protected]) Exeter
Clare Hennessey ([email protected]) Bristol
Akshat Vipin ([email protected]) Basingstoke
Planning Inspectorate:http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/
A30 Temple to Higher Carblake application for development consent:http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/South%20West/A30-Temple-to-Higher-Carblake-Improvement/
76
Questions?
wsp.com
77
Thank you!
wsp.com
78