好色先生TV

Delivering a major infrastructure project from start to finish can take a considerable amount of time, with delay often seen as a given part of the process. As a national infrastructure commissioner, one of the questions I am most often asked is why the UK鈥檚 infrastructure projects always seem to be delivered late and over budget.  

This is not true in its entirety but there are unarguably some high-profile examples of it happening, and each plays a part in shaping the widespread perception. Whether it is HS2, Hinkley Point C or 鈥� as people facing drought this summer were quick to point out 鈥� the slow pace at which new reservoirs are being built, there is clearly room for improvement. 

Governments past and present have been vocal about the need to speed up the delivery of nationally significant infrastructure projects, and the current government review of the planning process for such projects will, I hope, lead to solutions that make a material difference. 

Speeding up planning is important, and there is much we can learn from the approach of other countries with a reputation for getting things done on time. But we should also look beyond formal processes for solutions. 

The rush to get spades in the ground to demonstrate progress, generate headlines or meet an arbitrary deadline has measurable consequences in the construction or delivery phase

Sir John Armitt, chair of the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), often makes a point about how good we are in the UK at hurrying infrastructure projects, but how we are rather less good at knowing how to deliver them at speed. In other words, for too many politicians or project sponsors, the rush to get spades in the ground to demonstrate progress, generate headlines or meet an arbitrary deadline has measurable consequences in the construction or delivery phase.

A headlong rush to 鈥済et things moving鈥� can often fail to allow sufficient headroom for all the parameters of a project to be fully thought through at the start, which leads to unanticipated delays later.  

One way to overcome that tendency is by requiring proper consideration for design in all major infrastructure projects from the word go. Over many years I have seen how investment up front in good design avoids wasted time and money at later stages.

With more planning up front, costly re-engineering decisions become more easily avoidable. As such, having design excellence on projects form an integral part of our national policy statements 鈥� the strategic statements of government intent that shape new projects across key infrastructure sectors 鈥� would be one way to make this happen. 

Many of the current set of statements need urgent updating, with a greater emphasis placed on ensuring that each makes clear the value that major projects should apportion to good design. Fortunately, we already have a structure for what that guidance should include in the form of the four design principles the NIC design group established for national infrastructure in 2020, which cover people, climate, places, and value.

Great infrastructure design solves problems and maximises the different types of benefits as early as possible and across its whole lifetime

These grew out of a belief that great infrastructure design solves problems and maximises the different types of benefits as early as possible and across its whole lifetime. 

The NIC is already working with the Infrastructure Projects Authority to encourage adoption of the principles and their value in delivering projects faster on an individual basis. But we need to look ahead to the next logical step in the pursuit of faster delivery, which means embedding these principles in each national policy statement to create a more consistent, structured approach to design. 

Doing this would help to empower and embolden project teams to properly interrogate what a project is for, how it will best serve the location and nearby communities, how it might adapt to deliver full value throughout its lifetime and be resilient to the impacts of climate change. It is at this stage that future delays can be anticipated and eliminated. 

A clear design remit can also bring about more effective local consultations and ensure early consideration of environmental issues. Again, this would provide a route to mitigate risks that, if unaddressed, will inevitably require more time and money to resolve when the project is already under construction or even in operation. 

There are other benefits to integrating design into infrastructural projects from inception. An early focus on design can create joined-up, spatial planning outcomes that go wider than the infrastructure itself and bring direct benefit to local communities, such as ensuring a new reservoir delivers clear amenity benefits for leisure and tourism. 

Using design to do more than merely mitigate adverse effects from any project can also ensure projects are better aligned with emerging legislation on environmental impacts and, in doing so, reduce the risk of challenge further down the line. 

Projects such as Woolwich station on the Elizabeth line in London demonstrate the advantages of early design consideration 鈥� the project won the Design Principles award at the recent British Construction Industry Awards. Its design has helped it to become a focal point for regeneration and transformation of this part of London, enabling 4,000 new homes, including an eight-storey social housing block built over the station.

Too often, the national narrative on major infrastructure projects has been characterised by slow decision making and even slower delivery

It is an exemplar for how a major transport project can deliver value well beyond the simple movement of people. 

Too often, the national narrative on major infrastructure projects has been characterised by slow decision making and even slower delivery. It has been my continued belief that a greater focus on design could change this, becoming a means by which to solve and anticipate repeating problems with delivery, and crucially a way in which to shift the focus on the national infrastructure conversation.  

Design could redirect that focus back towards building an infrastructural legacy that improves the lives and livelihoods of future generations, creating a future legacy that is defined by the excellence with which we are more than capable of leading. 

Sadie Morgan is a co-founding director of dRMM, chair of the Quality of Life Foundation and a design advocate for the GLA