Archived decisions

Item 10

Report to the

Transport for South Hampshire Joint Committee

Date: 15 July 2008

Report by: Head of Planning Services, Portsmouth City Council

tel: 023 9283 46915

email: [email protected]

Subject: Port Master Plans - Consultation by Department for Transport

Purpose of the Report

To seek Members' views on a proposed response to the Department for Transport (DfT) consultation on Port Master Plans.

Recommendation

That Transport for South Hampshire advises the Department for Transport that it supports the principle of master plans for major ports as making an important contribution to facilitating the proper planning of the local, sub-regional and regional transport networks.

Introduction

1. The DfT is inviting views regarding draft guidance on port master plans. Airports are already required to prepare and consult on master plans. The Department is seeking the views of transport and planning authorities as well as port authorities. A short summary of the consultation is included as Appendix A.

Responsibility for preparing a master plan

2. The DfT has indicated that the responsibility for developing and consulting on master plans would rest with the relevant port authority. However it is likely that the contents of any port master plan anticipating growth in terms of port-related traffic or physical expansion would have implications for planning and transport authorities. This report proposes a response to the DfT by Transport for South Hampshire (TfSH) on behalf of the three highway and transport authorities.

3. Although the port of Portsmouth is managed by the City Council, it is considered more appropriate that the port authorities respond separately in that role. Similarly, the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire will be submitting a response on behalf of the local planning authorities in South Hampshire.

Consultation Response

4. The DfT has invited consultees to respond to three specific questions:

(i) Do you agree that major ports should be recommended to produce master plans?

The ports of Portsmouth and Southampton are vital to the economy of the sub-region and providing and maintaining good transport links to them is essential to ensuring their continued vitality. By requiring the facilities to have a comprehensive long term plan showing their future proposals and aspirations, importantly in the public domain, this will allow planning and transport authorities to be able to recognise any possible deficiencies in transport networks, both locally and on the national and regional routes, that in time could jeopardise the competitiveness of these national facilities. Early identification of potential problems would maximise the opportunities for timely interventions, including measures in support of more sustainable development and when appropriate submitting bids against, for example, the Regional Funding Allocation. TfSH therefore supports the principle of Port Master Plans.

(ii) What comments, if any, do you have on the draft guidance document?

The proposed guidance is comprehensive without being excessive.

(iii) Whether you approve of the term "master plan" itself in the ports context or would prefer another term which better covers the collaborative/consultative nature of the exercise?

It is, of course, not the name of the document but its content that will be important. However, the document name is likely to be regarded as representative of content. In consideration of this, TfSH proposes the term "Integrated Port Plans", in recognition of the symbiotic relationship that exists between ports and the linking transport networks. Ports should not be viewed as distinct operations from the land-side transport networks which feed into and are fed by ports.

Conclusions

5. A formal procedure of medium and long term planning for major ports, including consultation with stakeholders, would be an important contribution to other long term local, sub-regional and regional planning strategies and therefore is to be supported.

1716Rpt/PD

APPENDIX A

Summary of the Department for Transport consultation regarding draft guidance on Port Master Plans

(prepared by Paul Denyer, Portsmouth City Council, May 2008)

Introduction

The DfT draft recommends that all major ports produce Port Master Plans in order to help coordinate medium term planning.

A master plan's main purposes include:

· clarifying the port's own strategic planning for the medium to long term;

· assisting regional and local planning bodies, and transport network providers, in preparing and revising their own development strategies;

· informing port users, employees and local communities as to how they can expect to see the port develop over the coming years.

It does this by setting out:

· how the port expects to grow and develop its business over time;

· why this is feasible in the context of wider patterns of supply and demand;

· where changes of land-use are likely to be required to support growth areas;

· what alternative ways of meeting demand have been and will be considered;

· what environmental measures will be taken to ensure that not only are adverse effects mitigated, but as far as possible the port makes a positive contribution to environment and amenity;

· when individual development proposals will be put forward;

· how people will be consulted - both within the master planning process itself, and beyond.

DfT envisages that most major ports will find advantage in producing master plans. DfT defines a major port as one which handled at least 1M tonnes in 2000.

A time horizon of 20 to 30 years will represent an appropriate timescale for looking forward in most cases.

Content of plans

The contents list for each master plan will almost certainly be different from the rest, given the broad diversity of circumstances. However, it is possible to suggest a core set of sub-heads that are likely to appear in many instances:

· growth forecasts;

· infrastructure proposals;

· safeguarding, property and blight;

· commercial sensitivity;

· inland access;

· other social and economic impacts;

· safety and security;

· environmental impacts: overview;

· habitats and biodiversity, including marine habitat;

· water quality and pollution;

· the impacts of capital and maintenance dredging on the sea and estuary floor;

· contaminated land;

· 'local' air emissions;

· 'global' air emissions;

· noise;

· cultural and architectural heritage;

· landscape.

Consultation

DfT envisages comprehensive consultation, possibly in phases, including with Government and regional agencies, planning authorities, port users, the communities within which ports sit and with related industries, such as rail.

Post consultation

Realism of assumptions. The master plan should be a living document. Its underlying assumptions should be reviewed, in relation to the wider economic environment, the business plans of the port and its resident businesses and the success or otherwise of development aspirations. Review milestones should be planned at the outset, in such a way that feedback from the findings will be available in time to inform the next update of the plan itself.

Success of consultation procedures. Ports should also find it helpful to review the consultation process that was followed at the inception of the plan or at its previous review. Consulting on the master plan may also lead a port to review its practices for more routine consultation on the management and administration of the port.

Effectiveness of implementation. Once one or more major element in the plan has been implemented, it may be appropriate to begin a review of its effectiveness. Were expectations realised, and if not did the plans adapt flexibly?

Overall evaluation

After a period of around five years, depending on development implementation timescales, it should be possible to assess the overall effectiveness of the master plan.