Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Pitt says major project submissions are too detailed

Government planning supremo Sir Michael Pitt this week told developers to stop “intimidating” his major infrastructure planning unit with huge documents from project promoters.

pitt_two

Pitt: Major project planning applications contain too much detail

Pitt urged promoters to cut the scope of their planning applications and reduce the detail in their environment impact assessments (EIAs) before submitting them to the Planning Inspectorate’s National Infrastructure Directorate.

His call comes after electricity company EdF submitted a 36,000 page EIA as part of its planning application for a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point.

“Is that proportionate?” said Pitt. “I think this is intimidating. It is for us and it certainly is for local authorities.”

Pitt suggested developers were being over-cautious to ensure their projects are not delayed by judicial reviews, as has happened to High Speed 2.

But he said this had to stop. “We can start streamlining. The biggest savings are around the environment side. It’s my view and it’s the government view.”

Pitt said project promoters could limit the amount of documentation by developing statements of common ground with the statutory consultees such as local authorities. Doing this would enable his inspectors to focus on “areas of difference” during the statutory six month assessment period, he added.

Readers' comments (1)

  • Lee Stentiford

    I would tend to agree. Although never involved in preparing an EIA for a nuclear power station, I have been involved with a number of major developments and their associated planning applications and in my opinion the enormous documents that have to be produced always miss the point. There should be a focus on the fundamentals so the key environmental issues are dealtwith and applications are not bogged down with irrelevant waffle.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.